✦ High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025

BY AD vs LUKE J CHIRAYIL

Case Details High Court of India · 08 Apr 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

08 Apr 2025

Bench

P V KUNHIKRISHNAN

Length

3,245 words

Acts & Sections

Indian Penal Code §10 and 24 Indian Penal Code §34 Indian Penal Code §420

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 4 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SEENA C, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4713 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1945/2024 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3832 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 6 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV HRITHWIK C.S, SR. PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4717 OF 2025 CRIME NO.45/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN CMP NO.3835 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 8 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV NOUSHAD K A, SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM 9 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4728 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1939/2024 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDERDATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3831 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 10 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SR PP, NOUSHAD K A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4700/2025, 4706/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4736 OF 2025 CRIME NO.1620/2024 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3833 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. 12 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SEENA C, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 13 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4739 OF 2025 CRIME NO.89/2025 OF Kottayam East Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.03.2025 IN CMP NO.1476 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 14 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV NOUSHAD K A, SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 15 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4740 OF 2025 CRIME NO.52/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3836 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 16 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SR PP, NOUSHAD K A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4745 OF 2025 CRIME NO.317/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3830 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 18 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SEENA C, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4750 OF 2025 CRIME NO.38/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2025 IN CMP NO.1852 OF 2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 20 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 21 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4752 OF 2025 CRIME NO.366/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3798 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 22 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SR PP, HRITHWIK C S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 23 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4754 OF 2025 CRIME NO.369/2025 OF Kottayam West Police Station, Kottayam AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2025 IN CMP NO.3800 OF 2025 OF JUDL. MAGI. OF FIRST CLASS-III, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: PREETHI MATHEW AGED 49 YEARS, DAUGHTER OF A S MATHEW, CAN ASSURE CONSULTANCY SERVICES, OPPOSITE GENERAL HOSPITAL, VELLAPPALLY LANE, KOTTAYAM, KERALA, PIN – 686 001. BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL NAVANEETH KRISHNAN P.K. ZAINUDHEEN P. ARAVIND R. NAIR JACOB VICTOR RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682 031. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 24 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTAYAM WEST POLICE STATION, KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN – 686 013. BY ADV SEENA C, PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4728/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 25 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------- B.A.Nos. 4700/2025, 4706/2025, 4713/2025, 4717/2025,4728/2025,4736/2025, 4739/2025, 4740/2025, 4745/2025, 4750/2025, 4752/2025, ------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2025 C O M M O N O R D E R These Bail Applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita are connected, and therefore I am disposing these cases by a common order.

2. Petitioner in these cases is one and the same. The petitioner is the accused in different crimes registered at Kottayam West Police Station and Kottayam East Police Station. These cases are registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases (for short ‘IPC’) and also under Sections 10 and 24 of 26 Emigration Act.

3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner is running an institute by name ‘Can Assure Consultancy’ at Kottayam. The petitioner is the Managing Director of the said consultancy. It is alleged that the petitioner cheated the defacto complainants in this case by promising that they will provide job at UK and Australia. The said promise has not been fulfilled and the amount paid is not returned. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. The petitioner was arrested on 25.02.2025. Her arrest was recorded subsequently in the other crimes also. The petitioner is in custody from 25.02.2025.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases

5. It is true that the allegation against the 27 petitioner is serious. But, the fact remains that the petitioner is in custody from 25.02.2025. Indefinite incarceration of the petitioner is not necessary. The maximum punishment that can be imposed for the offences alleged are upto 7 years. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think the petitioner can be released on bail in these crimes, after imposing stringent conditions.

6. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement [2019 (16) SCALE 870], after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 28 the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.

7. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India [2024 KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must mention here that the Special Court and the High Court did not consider the material in the charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the appellant's case could not be properly appreciated. When a case is made out for a grant of bail, the Courts should not have any hesitation in granting bail. The allegations of the prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in a case like the present case where there are stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with only modification that the bail can be granted if the conditions in the statute are satisfied. The rule also means that once a case is made out for the grant of bail, the B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases 29 Court cannot decline to grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our Constitution.” (underline supplied)

8. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “53. The Court further observed that, over a period of time, the trial courts and the High Courts have forgotten a very well - settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. From our experience, we can say that it appears that the trial courts and the High Courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception is, at times, followed in breach. On account of non - grant of bail even in straight forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial courts and the High Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is rule and jail is exception".” B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases Considering the dictum laid down in the above 30 decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:

1. Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

2. The petitioner shall appear before Investigating Officer interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases person acquainted with the facts of 31 the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of jurisdictional Court.

4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

5. The observations and findings in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this bail application. The principle laid down by this Court in Anzar Azeez v. State of Kerala B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases [2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260] is 32 applicable in this case also.

6. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of the above conditions. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE AMR

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. B.A No.4700 of 2025 and Conn.Cases

3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of jurisdictional Court.

4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Indian Penal Code