Allowed

Raveendran @ Ravi v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Aug 2009Bail Appl./3339/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to petitioner accused of offences under IPC Sections 341, 324, and 326 based on settlement and lack of prosecutorial opposition, directing release on Rs.25,000 bond subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; petitioner to be released on executing bond for Rs.25,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount, subject to specified conditions.

Raveendran @ Ravi Vs State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH AUGUST 2009 / 14TH SRAVANA 1931

¶3

Bail Appl..No. 3339 of 2009

¶4

CRIME NO.21 OF 2009 OF KUDEYAMALA POLICE STATION

¶5

PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------RAVEENDRAZN @ RAVI,AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.KUTTAPPAN,ENGIYIL HOUSE,KRIVALLARI,NALLIKUTY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON SMT.GOVINDU P.RENUKADEVI

¶6

RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------STATE OF KERALA REP BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUDEYAMALA POLICE STATION,REP BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,ERNAKULAM.

¶7

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND

¶8

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶9

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶10

B.A. NO. 3339 OF 2009

¶11

-----------------------------------------------------Dated this the 5^th August, 2009

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.21 of 2009 of Kudeyamala Police Station in Kannur District.

¶14

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 341, 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. Though Section 308 was included and Section 326 was not included, subsequently offence under Section 308 was deleted and offence under Section 326 was added.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the disputes and differences between the parties have been settled amicably and that the de facto complainant has no grievance in the matter. Learned Public Prosecutor got telephonic instruction that there is some sort of a settlement between the parties.

¶16

B.A. NO. 3339 OF 2009

¶17

:: 2 ::

¶18

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

¶19

case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶24

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶25

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶26

ahz/

Raveendran @ Ravi v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raveendran @ Ravi 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

Basheer.P.P Vs State of Kerala

Sajikumar Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

M.Mahesh Vs the State of Kerala

A.Haja Vs State of Kerala

Sasi Kumar Vs the State of Kerala