Allowed

Roopan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jul 2011Bail Appl./3820/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to two accused persons facing charges under the Abkari Act. The court imposed conditions requiring them to report alternately on Mondays, appear for interrogation as needed, and refrain from influencing witnesses or committing further offences.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions of reporting, interrogation, non-influence of witnesses, and no further offences.

Roopan Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3820 of 2011

¶6

CR.NO.14 OF 2011 OF KUTTAMPUZHA EXCISE RANGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2

¶8

¶9

ROOPAN, S/O VASU, AGED 38 YEARS, EDAKKAD HOUSE, KONDIMATTAM KARA, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

SUNNY POULOSE, S/O POULOSE, AGED 52 YEARS, VELOOKKARA HOUSE, PINDIMANA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶12

RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KUTTAMPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM.

¶15

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶18

-----------------------------------------------------Bail Appl. NO. 3820 OF 2011

¶19

Dated this the 18^th day of July, 2011

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in CR.No.14 of 2011 of Kuttampuzha Excise Range.

¶22

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 56(b) and 57(a) of the Abkari Act.

¶23

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 5^th July, 2011, the following order was passed:

¶24

“After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on 12^th and 13^th July, 2011.

¶25

Post on 18.7.2011.

¶26

B.A. NO. 3820 OF 2011

¶27

:: 2 ::

¶28

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with CR.NO.14 of 2011 of Kuttampuzha Excise Range, Ernakulam District.”

¶29

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 5.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶30

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 5.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rupees Ten thousand each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶31

a) The petitioners 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;

¶32

B.A. NO. 3820 OF 2011

¶33

:: 3 ::

¶34

b) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶35

c) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶36

d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail;

¶37

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

¶38

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶39

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶40

ahz/

Roopan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roopan 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

Mahesh and Another Vs State of Kerala

Sameer Vs State of Kerala

C.Ramakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Krishna Prasad Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Vs State of Kerala

Rameshkumar Vs State of Kerala