Allowed

Shaji.P.Another v. State of Kerala and Another

Kerala HC18 Aug 2009Bail Appl./4118/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused under Sections 308 and 34 IPC for attempts to cause death, fixing bond amount and imposing reporting and non-interference conditions pending investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with a bond of Rs. 25,000 each, two sureties, and conditions including weekly reporting and prohibition on influencing witnesses.

Shaji.P.Another Vs State of Kerala and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4118 of 2009()

¶6

------------------------------------CRIME NO. 222/2009 OF THALASSERY POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

---------------------

¶9

1. SHAJI.P., S/O. VENUGOPALAN, AGED 36 YEARS, MECHANIC, KRISHNALAYAM,

¶10

P.O.CHOKLI.

¶11

2. SATHYAN, S/O. KUMARAN, AGED 32 YEARS, COOLIE, KUNNUMMAL,

¶12

ARUKANI ANDIPEEDIKA, P.O. CHOLKLI.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI. K.K. JAYARAJ NAMBIAR

¶14

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

¶15

---------------------------------------------

¶16

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

¶17

2. S.H.O. THALASSERY POLICE STATION.

¶18

BY SRI. P.RAVEENDRA BABU PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶21

B.A. No. 4118 of 2009

¶22

Dated this the 18^th day of August, 2009

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

¶25

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No. 222/2009 of Thalassery Police Station.

¶26

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶27

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 06.08.2009, the following order was passed:

¶28

“After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶29

and the learned Public Prosecutor at great length, I think, before disposing of the Bail Application, a direction could be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer, particularly in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent of the offence.

¶30

It is submitted that the petitioners will appear before the Investigating Officer on 11.08.2009 at 9 A.M. The investigating officer would be free to interrogate the petitioners at any time

¶31

B.A. No. 4118 of 2009 2

¶32

between 9 A.M. and 5 P.M. on that date.

¶33

Post the Bail Application on 13.08.2009.

¶34

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the

¶35

petitioners will not be arrested till then.”

¶36

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that as directed in the order dated 06.08.2009, the petitioners appeared before the police and they were questioned and their statements were also recorded.

¶37

I have gone through the Case Diary file and also the statements made by the petitioners before the police.

¶38

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence 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:

¶39

B.A. No. 4118 of 2009 3

¶40

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;

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶46

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶47

Shaji.P.Another v. State of Kerala and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji.P.Another v. State of Kerala and Another

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

K.P.Ismail Vs State of Kerala, (Sho Edacherry P.S.)

Pambady Chandu Vs State of Kerala

Kavilal Vs State of Kerala

Shaji @ Siddique & Others Vs the State of Kerala

Babu Jose Vs the State of Kerala

Shine Vs State of Kerala