Dismissed

Sureshkumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Feb 2011Bail Appl./1053/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, dismissed the petitioner's plea for bail in a criminal trial alleging cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The court cited the gravity of offences and the risk of witness intimidation as grounds for denial.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; case disposed expeditiously by the Judicial Magistrate.

Sureshkumar Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1932

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 1053 of 2011()

¶5

---------------------------------------C.C.NO.1225/2006 OF JFMC-1, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT CRIME NO.150/2005 OF ANCHAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

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

¶8

SURESH KUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.DHARMAN, SAJI BHAVAN VEEDU, NEAR PRAKASH GRAM, BALAGRAM VILLAGE, NEDUMKANDAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT, (JAYESH MANDIRAM, BHARATHANNOOR, PANGODE VILLAGE).

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.PIN-682 031

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sts

¶15

V.RAMKUMAR, J.

¶16

Bail Application No.1053 of 2011

¶17

Dated this the 25^th day of February, 2011

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petitioner, who is accused No.3 in Crime No.150 of 2005 of Anchal Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 120(b), 420, 468 & 471 read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 04/12/2010.

¶20

The application was opposed on behalf of the prosecution.

¶21

Having regard to the gravity of the offences, nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, the relative conduct of the parties, the propensities of the petitioner and the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the petitioner is released on bail, he will definitely influence and intimidate the prosecution witnesses. There is also the likelihood of the petitioner making himself scarce and fleeing from justice. I am, therefore, not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶22

Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Punalur shall dispose of the case expeditiously and that at any rate

¶23

Bail Appln.No.1053/2011

¶24

: 2 :

¶25

before the middle of April, 2011 having regard to the fact that the petitioner is an under trial prisoner who has been languishing in the jail from 04/12/2010 onwards.

¶26

This petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶27

Dated this the 25^th day of February, 2011.

¶28

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

¶29

skj

Sureshkumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sureshkumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reghu Vs State of Kerala

Thomas.G. Vs State of Kerala

Yousaf Vs Excise Range Officer

K.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Shameer Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala