Dismissed

Rema a & Another v. S.I. of Police,Nedumkandam & Another

Kerala HC8 Jun 2009Bail Appl./436/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam disposed of a bail application filed for anticipatory bail. The court dismissed the application, holding that investigation was necessary and that no prima facie case could be excluded under Section 420 IPC at this stage.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application is dismissed. No case for immediate bail granted as investigation is required.

Rema a & Another Vs S.I. of Police,Nedumkandam & Another — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2009 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1931

¶3

Bail Appl..No. 436 of 2009() -------------------------------------CRIME NO.348/2008 OF NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION

¶4

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2:

¶5

¶6

REMA.A., AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.VASUDHARAN MANGALATHU VEETIL, KALLUVATHUKKAL KARA & POLICE STATION LIMIT, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶7

VASUNDHARAN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN MANGALATHU VEETTIL, KALLUVATHUKKAL KARA & POLICE STATION LIMIT, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH

¶9

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶10

¶11

S.I. OF POLICE,NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION.

¶12

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

¶13

SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶16

B.A. No.436 of 2009

¶17

Dated this the 8^th day of June, 2009

¶18

This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438

¶19

of the code of criminal procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No.348/2008 of Nedumkandam Police Station.

¶20

The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

I have gone through the CD file and pursued the Annexures produced along with the Bail Application. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation and it is necessary to collect evidence at this stage. It cannot be concluded that no case is made out against the petitioners under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

¶23

B.A. No.436/ 2009

¶24

¶25

case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of

¶26

the view that the Bail Application is liable to be dismissed.

¶27

The Bail Application fails and is accordingly dismissed.

¶28

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶29

scm

Rema a & Another v. S.I. of Police,Nedumkandam & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rema a & Another v. S.I. of Police,Nedumkandam & 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

Kunjumon Vs State of Kerala

Aji Vs State of Kerala

Justine Paul Vs State of Kerala

K.B.Manoj & Another Vs State of Kerala

Sukumaran Vs State of Kerala

Sivan.P.K Vs State of Kerala