Dismissed

Jagadeesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jun 2011Bail Appl./3879/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court in Kerala High Court refused anticipatory bail to petitioners involved in offences punishable under Sections 341 and 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. Petitioners were directed to surrender for interrogation before specific dates, with provisions to apply for regular bail post-interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender for interrogation before June 24 or 25, 2011. permitted to seek regular bail after interrogation.

Jagadeesh Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2011 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3879 of 2011()

¶6

----------------------------CMP.1492/2011 of SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD CRIME NO. 241/2011 of OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:-

¶8

¶9

JAGADEESH, AGED 21 YEARSD, S/O. RAMKUMAR, KUNDUPARAMBU HOUSE, POST PANAMANNA SOUTH, OTTAPALAM TALUK.

¶10

SULESH, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O. HARINARAYANAN, KUNNATH HOUSE, PANAMANNA, OTTAPALAM TALUK.

¶11

BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI

¶12

SRI.R.SREEHARI

¶13

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:-

¶14

¶15

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

ADV. SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶19

.........................................

¶20

Bail Application No. 3879 of 2011

¶21

.......................................... Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2011.

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 241 of 2011 of Ottapalam Police Station, Palakkad for offences punishable under Sections 341 and 326 read with Section 34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

¶25

After evaluating the factors and parameters which are

¶26

to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 112 of the verdict of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v.

¶27

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 petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 24.06.2011 or on 25.06.2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the petitioners are arrested by the Investigating Officer before interrogation, the petitioners shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In

¶28

B.A. No. 3879/2011 -:2:-

¶29

case the interrogation of the petitioners is without arresting them, the petitioners 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 petitioners have been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of their application for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed.

¶30

In case the petitioners while surrendering before the Investigating Officer have 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 petitioners .

¶31

This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 13^th day of June, 2011.

¶32

sd/- V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A to Judge.

B.A. No. 3879/2011 -:3:-

Jagadeesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagadeesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khadeeja Vs the State of Kerala

Reeja P Vs Sub Inspector of Police,Malappuram

Vijeesh.M.P and Others Vs State of Kerala

Pratheep @ Prabhu Vs State of Kerala

Radha E.K. Vs State and Another

Maheen Vs State of Kerala