Allowed

Santhosh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Mar 2010Bail Appl./178/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused anticipatory bail for accused persons charged under various IPC sections. Instead, the Court directed them to surrender to the police for interrogation on specified dates, after which regular bail may be considered by the Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail refused; petitioners directed to surrender for interrogation; regular bail to be considered by Magistrate post-interrogation.

Santhosh Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 178 of 2010()

¶6

[ CRIME NO. 8/2010 OF EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION IN KOLLAM DIST]

¶7

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

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3

¶9

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

¶10

1. SANTHOSH S/O.KOCHUKUMARAN, SETHU BHAVANAM, NENMENI, MUNROTHURUTHU, KOLLAM.

¶11

2. SETHU, S/O.KOCHUKUMARAN, SETHU BHAVANAM, NENMENI, MUNROTHURUTHU,KOLLAM.

¶12

3. KOCHUKUMARAN, AGED 65 YEARS, SETHU BHAVANAM, NENMENI, MUNROTHURUTHU, KOLLAM.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

¶14

RESPONDENT: ---------------------

¶15

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, EAST KALLADA POLICE STATION IN KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶16

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. C.M. NAZAR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

PKK

¶19

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶20

Bail Application No. 178 of 2010

¶21

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

¶22

Dated this the 24^th day of March, 2010. O R D E R

¶23

Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.8 of 2010 of East Kallada Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324 and 308 r/w Section 34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

¶25

Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this

¶26

nature. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have their application for bail considered by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer on 05-04-2010 or 06-

¶27

04-2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. The petitioners shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate who on being satisfied that the petitioners have been interrogated by the police shall consider and dispose of their applications for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed.

¶28

This petition is disposed of as above.

¶29

Dated this the 24^th day of March, 2010.

¶30

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.

¶31

-:2:-

¶32

Santhosh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh 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

Johny and Another Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Abdul Salam and Others Vs Sub Inspector of Police and Another

Sharafudeen Vs State of Kerala & Others

Vineeth Vs State through S.H.O.,Taliparamba P.Stn.

Dr.Nizar Vs Si of Police

Ajayakumar Vs State of Kerala