SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12405

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P, J
VIJIL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
JITHIN BABU A, ANOOD JALAL K.J., NOUSHAD K A, SR. PP., ARUN SAMUEL FOR DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. The petitioners are accused Nos.4 and 5 in Crime No.343 of 2025 of Cherpu Police Station, Thrissur District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 126 (2) , 115(2) , 310(2) read with Section 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners together with the other accused in the case had threatened the de-facto complainant, slapped her and had taken away about 17 ducks and thereby they have committed the offences alleged against them.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners in this case have absolutely no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the offence of dacoity may not sustain against the petitioners. It is submitted that the issue has been settled between the petitioners and the de-facto complaint and the de-facto complaint, who is represented in Court through counsel, has no objection in bail being granted to the petitioners.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that accused Nos.1 to 3, who are the petitioners in the connected bail application namely, Bail Application No.5615 of 2025, have serious criminal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top