Petitioner sought anticipatory bail for an offence under Section 376 IPC. Court rejected anticipatory bail as interrogation was incomplete. Directed surrender for interrogation to enable subsequent application for regular bail.
Petitioner directed to surrender for interrogation; regular bail application to follow.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
MONDAY, THE 30TH MAY 2011 / 9TH JYAISHTA 1933
Bail Appl..No. 3725 of 2011()
CRIME NO.86/2011 of THIRUVAMBADY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:-
SATHEESH KUMAR,S/O.RAMACHANDRAN,AGED 49 YEARS, KOTTAYATHUVILA VEEDU, KAKKADAMPOYIL PO, KOODARANHI VIA,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,PIN 673 604.
BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:-
ADV. SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
.........................................
Bail Application No. 3725 of 2011
.......................................... Dated this the 30th day of May, 2011.
ORDER
Petitioner who is the sole accused in Crime No. 86 of 2011 of Thiruvambady Police Station, Kozhikode for an offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail.
to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 112 of the verdict of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 , I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 09.06.2011 or on 10.06.2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the petitioner is arrested by the Investigating Officer before interrogation, the petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the interrogation of the petitioner is without arresting him, the
B.A. No. 3725/2011
-:2:-
petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned on the same day or the next day and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that the petitioner has been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of his application for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed.
In case the petitioner while surrendering before the Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was not available after the production or appearance of the petitioner.
This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 30th day of May, 2011.
sd/- V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
rv
//True Copy//
P.A to Judge.
B.A. No. 3725/2011
-:3:-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted where the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioner.
What procedural direction is necessary to permit interrogation and recovery of incriminating material before considering regular bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and OthersReferred¶25
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SATHEESH KUMAR
STATE OF KERALA
V.RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
