Disposed

N.P.Thomas v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jan 2008Crl.MC/22/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala held that the circumstances for issuing non-bailable warrants against the petitioner were not discernible. Consequently, the court could not grant bail directly. Instead, the petition was disposed of by permitting the petitioner to surrender and file a bail application before the Magistrate. The pending warrants were not to be executed until the bail application was dispos

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed permitting petitioner to surrender and file bail before Magistrate within two weeks; warrants suspended pending bail decision.

N.P.Thomas Vs the State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 22 of 2008()

¶6

----------------------CC.101/2006 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, MANANTHAVADY

¶7

PETITIONER: ACCUSED

¶8

¶9

N.P.THOMAS, S/O PATHROSE, NANNAT HOUSE, PUTHUSSERYKKADAVU P.O., PADINJARETHARA, MANANTHAVADY VIA., WYNAD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.J.MATHEW

¶11

RESPONDENTS: STATE

¶12

¶13

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

¶14

V.N.ABDULLA, S/O ABDUL RAHMANKUTTY HAJI, VELLIYATHIRI, NADAKKAL VEEDU, PARAPPANPOYIL P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

V. RAMKUMAR , J.

¶18

================================= CRL.M.C. No. 22 of 2008

¶19

================================= Dated this the 3^rd day of January, 2008.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner, who is the accused in C.C. No. 101/2006 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mananthavady for an offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 IPC, prays for a direction to recall the Non Bailable Warrants pending against him and to release him on bail.

¶22

The circumstances under which Non Bailable Warrants were issued against the petitioner are not discernible. Hence, this Court cannot direct the enlargement of the petitioner on bail. The appropriate course would be to permit the petitioner to file an application for bail before the Magistrate and to direct the same to be disposed of. Accordingly, this Crl. M.C. is disposed of permitting the petitioner to surrender before the Magistrate and file an application for bail within two weeks from today. In case the petitioner complies with the above condition, the application for bail shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed. Warrant if any pending against the petitioner shall not be executed until the disposal of the bail application to be filed by the petitioner herein.

¶23

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶24

N.P.Thomas v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.P.Thomas v. the 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

Naseema Vs State of Kerala

Ramla Vs State of Kerala

Alappurayil Beerankutty Vs Si of Police

Abdul Salam Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

N.P.Thomas Vs the State of Kerala

Chandra Ghosh Vs State of Kerala and Another