Allowed

Jayaprakash v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Mar 2008Bail Appl./1208/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner charged under Sec.353 of the IPC arising from an altercation at a petrol bunk. The court issued directions for appearance before the magistrate and availability for interrogation without opposition from the public prosecutor.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to execution of bond and appearances before magistrate and investigating officer.

Jayaprakash Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1208 of 2008() -----------------------------

¶3

CRIME NO.87/08 OF KONNI POLICE STATION

¶4

PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶5

----------------------------------JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, KANNAN NIVAS, ARUVAPULAM (P.O), KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN

¶6

RESPONDENTS: STATE

¶7

¶8

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

¶9

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U. NAZAR.

¶10

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

R. BASANT, J.

¶12

B.A. No.1208 of 2008

¶13

------------------------------------------------Dated this the 3^rd day of March, 2008

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under Sec.353 of the IPC. The crux of the allegations is that two policemen, as deputed by their Sub Inspector, went to a petrol bunk to make enquiries on a complaint. The grievance in that complaint was about the employment of a girl in that petrol bunk. The parents of the girl had allegedly complained that she was being employed without their consent. The two Police Constables deputed to do the work had reached the petrol bunk in an autorikshaw. The petitioner at that time came on his motor-cycle to the petrol bunk. The petitioner is an important political functionary of the B.J.P., it is alleged. The petitioner allegedly took objection to the Police Constables conducting such an

¶16

B.A. No.1208 of 2008 -: 2 :-

¶17

enquiry. Why has the Sub Inspector himself not come for the enquiry; the petitioner allegedly queried. There was an exchange of words. The Police Constables immediately tried to contact their Sub Inspector. But before the Sub Inspector arrived, the petitioner went away. This, in short, is the allegations raised.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner prays, the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am satisfied that the petitioner can now be granted anticipatory bail subject to appropriate terms and conditions. In the absence of opposition, it is not necessary for me to advert to the facts in any greater detail in this order.

¶19

In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C:

¶20

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 10/3/2008. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.

¶21

(ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 11/3/2008. Thereafter, he shall so make himself

¶22

B.A. No.1208 of 2008 -: 3 :-

¶23

available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

¶24

(iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all;

¶25

(iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 10/3/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 10/3/08.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

¶28

Nan/

¶29

//true copy//

¶30

P.S. to Judge

Jayaprakash v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaprakash 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muhammed Hasnien @ Jadeb Vs State of Kerala

Beena Vs State of Kerala

Sajeevan Vs State of Kerala

Joseph @ Josy Vs State of Kerala

Vijayan Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala and Another