Allowed

Suku v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Mar 2008Bail Appl./997/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons. It observed that investigations were underway and allegations of grievous injury were not supported by medical certificates. The grant was subject to specific conditions regarding surrender and interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Petitioners granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within four days, execution of bonds for Rs.25,000/-, and availability for interrogation over a period of one month.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 997 of 2008()

¶6

---------------------------CRIME NO. 378/07 OF KOVALAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS : ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶8

¶9

SUKU, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARAN, MELEPARACKAL VEEDU, PARAVILA, PACHALLOOR P.O.

¶10

VIJESH, S/O.SUGATHAN, AGED 19 YEARS, AIRAYIL VEEDU, T.C.66/2796, PARAVILA, PACHALLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE

¶12

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT:

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOVALAM POLICE STATION.

¶15

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

R. BASANT, J.

¶18

¶19

Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are

¶22

accused 1 and 2. Altogether there are only two accused. The crime was registered initially under Sections 326 and 379 I.P.C. Both the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. In the course of the investigation, allegation under Section 379 I.P.C. has been deleted. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are absolutely innocent. False and vexatious allegations are raised against them. In fact the victim has not suffered any grievous injury at all. In these circumstances the petitioners may not be compelled to endure the trauma of arrest and detention merely because an unsustainable allegation under Section 326 I.P.C. has been raised against them. The learned

¶24

B.A.No. 997 of 2008

¶25

¶26

counsel points out that the Investigating Officer has himself realised that the allegation under Section 379 I.P.C. is not justified.

¶27

Sufficient time has been granted to the Prosecutor to satisfy the court that the victim has suffered any grievous injury. The learned Prosecutor fairly submits that the wound certificate does not show that the victim has suffered any grievous injury. However, the discharge certificate has not been obtained so far.

¶28

This petition was filed on 13.2.2008 and this Court has waited till this day for authentic submissions on this aspect. I am satisfied that the petitioners can now be granted anticipatory bail, subject to

¶29

appropriate conditions.

¶30

In the result:

¶31

(1) This application is allowed.

¶32

(2) The following directions are issued under Section 438

¶33

Cr.P.C.

¶34

(a) The petitioners shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on 18.3.2008 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioners on regular bail on condition that they execute bonds

¶35

B.A.No. 997 of 2008

¶36

¶37

for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.

¶38

(b) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 19.3.08 and 22.3.2008. During this period, the investigators shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioners in custody and take all necessary steps in connection with the investigation. Thereafter they shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

¶39

(d) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 18.3.2008 and the police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law.

¶40

(b) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on 18.3.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released on

¶41

B.A.No. 997 of 2008

¶42

¶43

bail on their executing bonds for Rs.25,000/- each without any surety

¶44

undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 18.3.2008.

¶45

(R. BASANT) Judge

¶46

Suku v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suku 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

Varghese Vs State of Kerala & Others

Chacko Abraham Vs State of Kerala

Satheeshkumar Vs State of Kerala & Another

Nishad Vs State of Kerala

Lagy Philip Vs State of Kerala

Firozkhan @ Firoz Vs State of Kerala