Allowed

Jayakumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Jun 2010Bail Appl./2018/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who was implicated in a case involving seizure of contraband under the Abkari Act, finding no prima facie suspicion of complicity despite being near the premises during police action.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to surrender within ten days, executing a bond with sureties, and cooperating with the investigating officer.

Jayakumar Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 2018 of 2010() ----------------------------(CRIME NO.742/2009 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT)

¶5

PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶6

-------------------------------------JAYAKUMAR, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. PADMANABHAN, MUKULAVILA VADAKKETHIL, NELLIMUGHAL P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶8

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT --------------------------

¶9

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADOOR POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶10

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR M.S BREEZ

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

K.HEMA, J

¶13

B.A No.2018 OF 2010

¶14

Dated this the 11^th day of June 2010

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

¶17

The alleged offence is under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on 06/07/2009, at about 5:30 p.m, on the basis of a prior information, the police party came to a building in which an automobile workshop was conducted. From the terrace of the building, contraband article was seized. Petitioner was found standing near the building and he escaped on seeing the police.

¶18

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner has no connection with the workshop from where the article is seized. Only because petitioner was standing near the building, he is implicated in the crime, on some misunderstanding. Petitioner has reported before the Investigating Officer as directed by this court and explained his innocence.

¶19

This petition is not opposed. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed.

¶20

B.A No.2018 OF 2010

¶21

¶22

(1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within ten days from today.

¶23

(2) On such surrender, petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate

¶24

on condition that he shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed and co-operate with investigation.

¶25

Petition is allowed.

¶26

K.HEMA JUDGE

¶27

vdv

Jayakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayakumar 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

Ashik.K.a Vs the Station House Officer,Kasaragod

Muhammed Shameem Vs Union of India

Aniyankunj Vs State of Kerala

Samdeep Varghese Vs State of Kerala and Others

Mohanan & Another Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Kanjikuzhy

Muhammed Sirajudheen and Others Vs the Sub Inspector of Police,Ernakulam