Allowed

Renjith v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2010Bail Appl./449/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the second accused under Section 438 CrPC. The court imposes specific conditions regarding police reporting, interrogation appearance, non-interference with witnesses, and obtaining bond with sureties upon arrest.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed subject to police reporting on alternate Mondays, appearing for interrogation, not influencing witnesses/not offending. Release on bond of Rs. 15,000 with two solvent suretie

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2010 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 449 of 2010() ---------------------------CRIME NO.990/2009 OF KODUNGALLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR.

¶2

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶3

---------------------------------------RANJITH, AGED 18 YEARS S/O.RAVEENDRAN, THAYAVALLIYIL HOUSE METHALA VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶4

BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.A.S.SABU

¶5

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶6

SRI. I.V. PRAMOD, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶7

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶8

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶9

B.A. No.449 of 2010

¶10

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2010

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.990/2009 of Kodungallur Police Station.

¶13

The offences alleged against the petitioner are

¶14

under Sections 341, 323 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 2/03/2010, the following order was passed;

¶16

“ After having heard the learned counsel for

¶17

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 A.M. on 8^th and 9^th March, 2010.

B.A. No.449/2010

Post on 15/3/2010.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor

¶22

that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.990 of 2009 of Kodungallur Police Station, Thrissur.

¶23

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.”

¶24

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner has complied with the direction contained in the order dated 2/03/2010.

¶25

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, 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:

¶26

B.A. No.449/2010

¶27

¶28

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;

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶34

above.

¶35

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶36

scm

Renjith v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renjith 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

Justin Vs State of Kerala

Jacob Tomy Vs State of Kerala

Mani Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Tutu Narayanan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Jyothish Vs State of Kerala

M.Kunhammed Vs the State of Kerala