Allowed

Baburaj v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Oct 2007Bail Appl./6231/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application by four accused persons involved in a gathering altercation resulting in injuries was allowed on regular bail subject to specific conditions. The court ordered investigation completion before release and imposed bonds and movement restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail with bonds, sureties, specific interrogation schedule, and movement restrictions until 27.10.2007.

Baburaj Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2007)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2007 / 23RD ASWINA 1929

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6231 of 2007() ----------------------------CRLMC.2026/2007 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM CRIME NO.278 OF 2007 OF THIRUVALLOM POLICE STATION ....................

¶6

: PETITIONERS ACCUSED 1 TO 4

¶7

¶8

BABURAJ,S/O. VISWAMBHARAN, VENGARA P[ADINJARE PUTHEN VEEDU NEAR VENGARA DEVI TEMPLE, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE.

¶9

SANTHOSH KUMAR @ ANIL S/O. SUKUMARAN, MONILAM CHEMMANNUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, THIRUVALLAM DESOM,THIRUVALLA VILLAGE

¶10

DILEEP,S/O.CHANDRAN, PATTUKUNNU LAKSHAM VEEDU, VELLAR SAMUDRA BEACH ROAD, PACHALLOOR DESOM, THIRUVALLAM VILLAGE.

¶11

SHALU,S/O. BASI, KOLLAMTHARA KANAKKAPILLAI VEEDU PACHALLOOR DESOM, PACHALLOOR VILLAGE.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA

¶13

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINAT STATE

¶14

¶15

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

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/10/2007, THE COURT ON 15/10/2007 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

R.BASANT, J

¶19

B.A.No.6231 of 2007

¶20

Dated this the 15^th day of October, 2007

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Application for regular bail. Petitioners are accused 1 to 4. Altogether there are 15 accused persons. The alleged incident took place on 4.09.07. The petitioners were arrested on 12.09.07. They continue in custody from that date. Investigation is not complete. None of the accused persons is named in the F.I.R.

¶23

The crux of the allegations is that some persons went to a local bar and there was an incident of altercation on some earlier date. The victims in this case who are said to be the workers of that bar were allegedly returning home on 4.9.07 after closing the bar. On account of prior animosity, after having made the necessary preparations, an unlawful assembly of about 15 persons including the petitioners herein armed with dangerous weapons like swords, sticks etc. allegedly mounted an attack on the victims. 5 persons were injured. Some of the victims had suffered fractures. 5 fractures have been suffered by one of the victims.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. The local R.S.S people are against the running of the bar. There are certain disputes on that aspect. Merely because of that the petitioners have been falsely dragged into

¶25

B.A.No.6231 of 2007

¶26

¶27

the controversy. The petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. In any view of the matter, the petitioners do not deserve to continue in custody now, they having remained in custody from 12.09.07.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that an explosive law and order situation prevails in the locality. Allegations are serious. The injuries suffered are all grievous. The recurrence of such instances is apprehended by the police, it is submitted. In these circumstances, the petitioners may not be enlarged on bail, submits the learned Public Prosecutor .

¶29

Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am satisfied, notwithstanding the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor , that the petitioners who have been remaining in custody from 12.09.07 can be granted bail subject to appropriate conditions. Appropriate conditions can be imposed to allay the apprehensions aired by the learned Public Prosecutor and in the interests of a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation.

¶30

In the result, this application is allowed. The petitioners shall be released on bail on the following terms and conditions.

¶31

i) The petitioners shall not be released on the strength of this order prior to 27.10.2007. The Investigators shall in the meantime make every endeavour to complete the investigation.

¶32

B.A.No.6231 of 2007 3

¶33

ii) The petitioners shall execute bonds for Rs.1,00,000/(Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;

¶34

iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a period of 3 months from the date of their release and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so;

¶35

iv) During the said period of 3 months, the petitioners shall not enter the Sessions Division of Trivandrum except for the purpose of complying with condition No.(iii) above.

¶36

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶37

rtr/-

Baburaj v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baburaj 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

Anil P.V. Vs State of Kerala

Aboobacker Haji Vs State of Kerala

Vijesh Vs S.I of Police, Kareelakulangara Police S

Johnson @ Havala Johnson Vs State of Kerala

Subramanian Vs State of Kerala

Rasal Babu Vs State of Kerala