Allowed

A.K.Suresh and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2010Bail Appl./527/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to three accused persons facing charges under Sections 143, 147, 148, 308, 323, 341 and 149 IPC. The court imposed conditions including production before the investigating officer and prohibition on influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail conditioned on executing a bond for Rs. 15,000 each with two solvent sureties of the same amount and compliance with specified reporting and conduct conditions.

A.K.Suresh and Ors. 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 K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 527 of 2010() -------------------------------CRIME NO. 101/2010 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED :

¶7

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

¶8

1. A.K.SURESH, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. TRITTAHI, KUSAVAN KUNNU, ANANDANSHRAMAM P.O., MAVUNKAL, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶9

2. RAVEENDRAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIKANNAN, ANANDANSHRAMAM P.O., MAVUNKAL, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶10

3. BABU K.V., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. KANNAN, PANNERADUKKAN, BELLA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶18

B.A. No. 527 of 2010

¶19

Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2010

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.101/2010 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District.

¶22

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 341 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 24.02.2010, the following order was passed:

¶24

“After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 04^th and 05^th March, 2010. The petitioners shall produce a copy of the order before the

¶25

B.A. No. 527/2010 2

¶26

investigating officer.

¶27

Post on 11.03.2010.

¶28

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.101/2010 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod.

¶29

Hand over copy to both sides.”

¶30

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners have complied with the direction contained in the order dated 24.02.2010.

¶31

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 petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs. 15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶32

B.A. No. 527/2010 3

¶33

A) The petitioners 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 petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶35

C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶36

D) The petitioners 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

¶39

above.

¶40

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶41

A.K.Suresh and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.K.Suresh and Ors. 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

Vinod Vs State of Kerala

Nalini Vs State of Kerala

Aji@ Ani Vs State of Kerala

Praveen Vs State of Kerala

Sanil Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Prejith Vs the State of Kerala