w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Ranjith J. Kappen v/s State of Kerala Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

    Bail. Appl. No. 3132 of 2018

    Decided On, 10 July 2018

    At, High Court of Kerala


    For the Petitioner: V.A. Johnson (Varikkappallil), Advocate. For the Respondents: Amjad Ali, Public Prosecutor.

Judgment Text

1. This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No. 1324 of 2018 of the Kothamangalam Police Station, registered under Sections 354 (A), 366 and 506 of the IPC.

3. The de facto complainant joined RJ Kappens, a concern owned by the applicant, on 3.4.2018, as an Assistant Manager. On 17.4.2018, the applicant herein is alleged to have demanded the de facto complainant and another lady, who was working in the same capacity, to accompany him to the Veterinary College at Wayanad, to study about a project. As requested, on 19.4.2018, they took a bus to Ankamaly from where they proceeded with the applicant to Alathoor in a car. It is alleged that the applicant made sexually explicit remarks and behaved in an improper manner. They stayed in a guest house and late in the night, the applicant is alleged to have disturbed them by knocking their door. On the next day, on their way to Wayanad, the applicant forced them to pose for taking photographs and he is alleged to have touched their breasts. He was pushed aside and somehow or the other, they managed to get out while they reached Thamrasseri and returned back home in a bus. On 23.4.2018, they went to the establishment of the applicant for getting back the certificates. They were asked to come on the next day. On 24.4.2018, the de facto complainant went with her relatives and managed to obtain the certificates which were retained by him. Stating these allegations and alleging sexual harassment, a complaint was lodged on 25.4.2018 leading to the registration of the crime.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the allegations against the applicant are without a tinge of truth. It is submitted that at the instance of the applicant, Crime No.1338 of 2018 was registered against the de facto complainant and 10 others, in relation to the incident which took place in his office on 24.4.2018. According to the learned counsel, on 24.4.2018, at 3.30 p.m., the de facto complainant along with certain others had trespassed into the concern of the applicant herein and had beaten him up mercilessly attributing some wrong on the part of the applicant. He had suffered fractures on his ribs as well as on his facial bone. The learned counsel also refers to Annexure-C discharge summary issued from the Elite Mission Hospital to substantiate his contention. According to the learned counsel, the instant Crime at the instance of the lady was registered much later to dampen the allegations levelled by the applicant.

5. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the materials on record. Annexure-C reveals that the applicant herein had sustained numerous injuries including fracture. It is undisputed that the instant Crime was registered much later. Furthermore, after completion of investigation, final report has been laid in the Crime registered at the instance of the applicant.

6. Having regard to the sequence of events, the nature and gravity of the allegations and attendant facts, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary for an effective investigation.

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. However, the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

i) He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 10.a.m and 1 p.m for a period of two months or till the final report is filed whichever is earlier.

ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer, nor shall he tamper with the evidence. iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

LawyerServices is a Premium Legal Tech solution.

Lawyers, Law Firms, Government Departments and Corporates rely on us for, Workflow Automation, Data Aggregation, Timely Updates, Case Management, Intelligent Research, Latest Legal Data Updates and a LOT more!

If you are a legal professional, CONTACT US, in order to see how our UNIQUE solution can benefit your organization.

Features Intro Close Box