Allowed

Arun S/O Chandran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Oct 2009Bail Appl./5622/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court was asked to decide on an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The petitioner, the fifth accused, had complied with a prior order directing him to appear before the investigating officer. The trial court, finding reasons in the facts and nature of the offence, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The Bail Application was allowed; the petitioner to be released on bail upon arrest on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount.

Arun S/O Chandran Vs State of Kerala — 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

TUESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2009 / 28TH ASWINA 1931

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5622 of 2009

¶6

CRIME NO.92 OF 2009 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED:

¶8

¶9

ARUN, S/O.CHANDRAN, AGED 18, KARAKKATTUVILA VEEDU, PALLICHAL VILLAGE, PAKALOOR P.O., TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT:

¶12

¶13

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

¶14

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶17

B.A. NO. 5622 OF 2009

¶18

Dated this the 20^th day of October, 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 petitioner is the fifth accused in Crime No.92 of 2009 of Balaramapuram Police Station.

¶21

The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

¶23

7.10.2009, the following order was passed:

¶24

“After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 AM on 14^th and 15^th October, 2009.

¶25

B.A. NO. 5622 OF 2009

¶26

:: 2 ::

¶27

Post on 20^th October, 2009.

¶28

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.92 of 2009 of Balaramapuram Police Station.”

¶29

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner has complied with the order dated 7.10.2009.

¶30

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also the fact that the petitioner has complied with the direction in the order dated 7.10.2009, 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.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶31

B.A. NO. 5622 OF 2009

¶32

:: 3 ::

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶39

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶40

ahz/

Arun S/O Chandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun S/O Chandran 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

Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Leela.M. Vs State of Kerala,Rep.by S.I.of Police

Ratheesh Vs State of Kerala

Vasanthi Vs State of Kerala

John Vs State of Kerala

Sainath Rao Vs State of Kerala