Allowed

Manikandan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Mar 2010Bail Appl./744/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an application for anticipatory bail. The accused faced charges under IPC and the Arms Act. The court directed the police to release the petitioner on bail upon arrest if the specified conditions and bond were met.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed on personal bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties for like amount, subject to specific reporting and conduct conditions.

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. 744 of 2010() -------------------------------CRIME NO. 571/2009 OF KILIKOLLUR POLICE STATION

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ----------------------------

¶7

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

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶9

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

¶10

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.571 OF 2009 OF KILIKALLUR POLICE STATION).

¶11

BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶12

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

¶13

K.T. SANKARAN, J.

¶14

B.A. No. 744 of 2010

¶15

Dated this the 23^rd day of March, 2010

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

¶18

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No. 571/2009 of Kilikollur Police Station, Kollam District.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

“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

¶22

B.A. No. 744 of 2010 2

¶23

officer at 9 A.M. on 17^th and 18^th March, 2010. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order before the investigating officer.

¶24

Post on 23.03.2010.

¶25

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No. 571/2009 of Kilikollur Police Station, Kollam District.

¶26

Hand over copy to both sides.”

¶27

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶28

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

¶30

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:

¶31

B.A. No. 744 of 2010 3

¶32

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;

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶38

above.

¶39

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶40

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