Partly allowed

Varghese v. State

Kerala HC9 Sept 2010Bail Appl./2476/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the plea for anticipatory bail due to the nature of the case but directed the petitioner to surrender for interrogation. It granted interim liberty to seek regular bail from the Magistrate, recommending release on specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender on 20.9.2010 or 22.9.2010 for interrogation; permitted to approach Magistrate for regular bail with recommended conditions.

Varghese Vs State — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 18TH BHADRA 1932

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2476 of 2010(B)

¶6

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

¶7

(CRIME. 262 OF 2010 OF MALA POLICE STATION)

¶8

PETITIONER (S): 1ST ACCUSED:

¶9

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

¶10

VARGHESE, S/O.VARKEY, KALAPURACKAL HOUSE, MALA PALLIPPURAM DESOM VILLAGE.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT:

¶13

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

¶14

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA POLICE STATION.

¶15

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZE

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

SVS/

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

B.A. No.2476 of 2010

¶21

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated: 9**^th day of September, 2010

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioner, who is the sole accused in Crime No.262/2010 of Mala Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 465 and 420 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

¶25

Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for bail considered by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 20.9.2010 or 22.9.2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. The petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate concerned and file an application for regular bail. On being convinced that the petitioner has been interrogated by the police, the Magistrate shall preferably on the same date on which the application is filed, release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate and subject to the following conditions:-

¶26

B.A. No.2476 of 2010

¶27

¶28

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.

¶29

The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶30

Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution.

¶31

Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶32

If the petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶33

This petition is disposed of as above.

¶34

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶35

dmb

Varghese v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varghese v. State

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

Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Muthupandi and Others Vs Sub-Inspector of Police,Marayoor

Anandan Vs State of Kerala

Dileepkhan Vs State of Kerala

Shine Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Sumesh Vs State of Kerala