Allowed

T.S.Girivas v. State

Kerala HC3 Jun 2009Bail Appl./1841/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered three bail applications filed under Section 438 CrPC regarding an incident of political clash involving grievous injuries and rioting. The Court held that anticipatory bail was granted subject to specific conditions including a bond of Rs. 25,000 and restrictions on influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two solvent sureties and compliance with specific conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

T.S.Girivas Vs State — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2009 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1931

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1841 of 2009

¶6

CRIME NO.322 OF 2009 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.3

¶8

¶9

T.S. GIRIVAS, S/O. SUKUMARAN,

¶10

AGED 27 YEARS, EXTRA DEPARTMENTAL BRANCH POSTMASTER, P.O. THIPPILLISSERY - 680 519, KARIKKAD VIA.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

¶12

RESPONDENTS: STATE - COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

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

¶15

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KUNNAMKULAM.

¶16

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2009, ALONGWITH B.A.NO.1752 AND 1753 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶19

-----------------------------------------------------B.A. Nos.1752, 1753 & 1841 OF 2009

¶20

Dated this the 3^rd June, 2009

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

These Bail Applications are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. B.A.No.1752 of 2009 is filed by accused Nos.1, 2, 5 and 7, B.A.No.1753 of 2009 is filed by accused Nos.4, 6, 8 and 9 and B.A.No.1841 of 2009 is filed by the third accused in Crime No.322 of 2009 of Kunnamkulam Police Station.

¶23

The offence alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 326 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that Crime No.327 of 2009 was registered against the de facto complainant and others in respect of the incident, in which, grievous injuries were sustained by accused Nos.8 and 9 in the present case. It is also pointed out that as per the order dated 8.4.2009 in Crl.M.C.No.476 of 2009, anticipatory bail was granted by the Sessions Judge of Thrissur to the accused persons in Crime No.327 of 2009.

¶25

B.A. NOS.1752, 1753 AND 1841 OF 2009

¶26

:: 2 ::

¶27

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and perusing a copy of the order in Crl.M.C.No.476 of 2009 referred to above, it is fairly clear that there was a dispute between three political groups and there was a clash. Some of the persons sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though accused Nos.7 and 8 in the present case sustained stab injuries and fracture, in Crime No.327 of 2009, Section 308 was not included, while in the present case, though the de facto complainant sustained only a fracture to the nasal bone, Section 308 is also included to see that bail is denied to the petitioners.

¶28

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the injury sustained and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶29

B.A. NOS.1752, 1753 AND 1841 OF 2009

¶30

:: 3 ::

¶31

a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶32

b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶33

c) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail.

¶34

The Bail Applications are allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶35

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶36

ahz/

T.S.Girivas v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.S.Girivas v. State

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

Santhosh Vs State of Kerala

Ammini Vs the State of Kerala

C.K.Jayachandran Vs State of Kerala

Vipin Vs State of Kerala

P.Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Chandrika Vs State of Kerala