Sasi Kumar and Another v. State of Kerala
Case brief
What is this about?
In a bail application under Section 379 IPC, the court refused anticipatory bail but directed petitioners to surrender for interrogation. Regular bail is to be considered by the Magistrate or Court after interrogation and hearing the prosecution.
What did the court decide?
Petitioners directed to surrender for interrogation before 11.04.2011 or 12.04.2011; thereafter apply for regular bail.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933
Bail Appl..No. 1919 of 2010() -------------------------------CRIME NO.249/2010 OF PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION
PETITIONERS: ACCUSED 1 AND 2
- SASI KUMAR, PUTHUVEDETTIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PIDAVOOR.P.O, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
- BIJU KUMAR, PUTHUVEETTIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PIDAVOOR.P.O, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL
RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAPURAM P0LICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted where the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioners.
Whether the petitioners are directed to surrender for interrogation before applying for regular bail.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sasi Kumar
- petitioner
Biju Kumar
- respondent
State of Kerala
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court