Allowed

Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Mar 2010Bail Appl./737/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bail application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC was heard. The petitioner was accused of rioting and related offences. The court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions including periodic reporting, appearance for interrogation, and prohibition from influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed, with direction that if arrested, petitioner shall be released on bail for Rs. 15,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of reporting and conduct.

Manikandan 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

TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 737 of 2010() -------------------------------CRIME NO. 573/2009 OF KILIKOLLUR POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

¶7

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

¶8

MANIKANDAN, AGED 34 YEARS, "NAKSHATHRA NAGAR, BUNGLAWIL THODIYIL, KILIKALLUR, KOLLAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶10

RESPONDENT/STATE : --------------------------

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO. 573 OF 2009 OF KILIKALLUR POLICE STATION).

¶12

BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶15

B.A. No. 737 of 2010

¶16

Dated this the 23^rd day of March, 2010

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

¶19

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No. 573/2009 of Kilikollur Police Station, Kollam District.

¶20

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 427, 323, 324, 294(b) and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶21

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 11.03.2010, the following order was passed:

¶22

“After having heard the learned counsel for 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 17^th and 18^th March, 2010. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the

¶23

B.A. No. 737 of 2010 2

¶24

order before the investigating officer.

¶25

Post on 23.03.2010.

¶26

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No. 573/2009 of Kilikollur Police Station, Kollam District.

¶27

Hand over copy to both sides.”

¶28

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner has complied with the direction contained in the order dated 11.03.2010.

¶29

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:

¶30

B.A. No. 737 of 2010 3

¶31

A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on alternate Thursdays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶37

above.

¶38

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶39

Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manikandan 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

Biju @ Kilimuthu Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Robin Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu.K.v. Vs State of Kerala

Suraj Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala