Allowed

Shaji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Aug 2009Bail Appl./3733/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Ernakulam granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of causing hurt and grievous hurt under IPC Sections 324, 326, and 34, subject to reporting, interrogation, non-influence of witnesses, and no further offences.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties, subject to conditions of reporting, interrogation, and no tampering with evidence or further offences.

Shaji Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2009 / 13TH SRAVANA 1931

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 3733 of 2009()

¶5

---------------------------------------CRIME NO.498/2009 OF MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION.

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2:

¶7

¶8

SHAJI, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, MURITHARA HOUSE, CHALINGAD DESOM, KAIPAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

ABDUL KHADER, MURITHARA HOUSE, CHALINGAD DESOM, KAIPAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.A.JALEEL

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA (REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE - CR.498/2009 OF MATHILAKOM POLICE STATION) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶17

B.A. No.3733 of 2009

¶18

Dated this the 4^th day of August, 2009

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.498/2009 of Mathilakam Police Station.

¶21

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

¶22

Sections 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner herein is the defacto complainant in Crime No.497/2009 of Mathilakam Police Station. In that case, there are six accused persons. The defacto complainant in the present case is the accused No.5 in Crime No.497/2009. Offences alleged against the accused in Crime No.497/2009 are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 341, 452, 326 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the accused persons in Crime No.497/2009 are the aggressors and the present crime, namely, Crime No.498/2009 was

¶25

B.A. No.3733 /2009

¶26

Page numbers

¶27

registered as a counter blast to the real incident involved in

¶28

Crime No.497/2009.

¶29

I have perused the Case Diary in both the cases.

¶30

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

¶31

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

¶32

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:

¶33

A) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶34

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

¶35

C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶36

D) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or

¶37

B.A. No.3733 /2009

¶38

Page numbers

¶39

indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail.

¶40

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

¶41

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶42

above.

¶43

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶44

scm

Shaji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji 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

P.K.Divakaran Vs the State of Kerala

Liju Oommen Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Manzoor Vs State of Kerala

Basheer.P.P Vs State of Kerala

Sajikumar Vs State of Kerala

Vipin Kumar & Others Vs Circle Inspector, Ranni Police & Another