Allowed

Subhash Varma v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Feb 2007Bail Appl./507/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-paragraph order granting anticipatory bail where the petitioner surrendered as directed by a prior Sessions Court order even though full arrest and interrogation had not yet occurred. Petitioner to be released on bail for two months upon surrender between specified dates.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner shall be released on bail for a period of two months upon surrender to the investigating officer between 8-2-2007 and 20-2-2007.

Subhash Varma Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6TH FEBRUARY 2007 / 17TH MAGHA 1928

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 507 of 2007() ---------------------------CRIME NO. 1283/06 CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED ------------------------

¶7

SUBHASH VARMA, S/O.K.L.MOHANA VARMA, 603, AKARIA ARCADU, AYYAPPANKAVU, ERNAKULAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU SRI.K.J.PRAJI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 6/02/2007, THE COURT ON 06/02/2007 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶15

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Bail Application NO. 507 of 2007**

¶16

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated, this the 6**^th day of February 2007

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail on the allegation that even though he was granted anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court, Ernakulam as per Annexure A order dated 6-10-2006 in Crl.M.C. 1168/2006, he has only been interrogated by the investigating officer and he was not arrested by the said officer nor granted bail as directed.

¶19

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that it is true that the petitioner reported before the investigating officer for interrogation but he was not granted bail as it was felt that the matter would be squared up between the de facto complainant and the petitioner and that was the reason why the petitioner was not enlarged on bail.

¶20

That is not a valid justification on the part of the investigating officer in not complying with the order of the Sessions court. The petitioner having reported before the investigating officer, as directed in the bail order was bound to to be released on bail after he was formally arrested. Accordingly, if the petitioner surrenders

¶21

Bail Application No. 507/07 -:2:-

¶22

before the investigating officer on any day between 8-2-2007 and 122-2007, he shall be released on bail for a period of two months in compliance of the bail order granted by the Sessions Court.

¶23

With the above observation, this petition is disposed of .

¶24

V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE)

¶25

ani.

Subhash Varma v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Varma v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ummer ,M, Vs State of Kerala

A.Ganesan Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation

Sasidharan.B. Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Pradeep Vs State of Kerala

A.M.Abdul Majeed Vs State of Kerala and Another

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala