The Court directed the accused to surrender for interrogation rather than granting anticipatory bail. The order mandated regular bail applications only after police interrogation.
Petitioner directed to surrender for interrogation; regular bail application permitted post-interrogation.
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
THURSDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2011 / 2ND ASHADHA 1933
Bail Appl..No. 4422 of 2011()
-----------------------CRIME NO. 543 OF 2011 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SRIJITH @ MANI, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 26 YEARS, VALAVARA HOUSE, CHANDRAPENNY, THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV
RESPONDENT(S): STATE:
STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.543/2011 OF MATHILAKAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT).
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZE
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
.........................................
Bail Application No. 4422 of 2011
..........................................
Dated: 23-06-2011
ORDER
Petitioner who is the sole accused in Crime No. 543 of 2011 of Mathilakam Police Station, Thrissur District for offences punishable under Sections 324 and 308 I.P.C. seeks anticipatory bail.
B.A. No. 4422 of 2011 -:2:-
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 23rd day of June, 2011.
Sd/- V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
ani/
/true copy/
P.S. to Judge
B.A. No. 4422 of 2011 -:3:-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail can be granted where the petitioner has not yet been interrogated by the investigating officer.
What procedural steps the petitioner must follow after being directed to surrender for interrogation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and OthersExplained¶2
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
SRIJITH @ MANI
STATE OF KERALA
V.RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
