The High Court of Kerala denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner, directing him to surrender on specified dates for police interrogation under Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre guidelines. Regular bail may be sought after interrogation.
Petitioner directed to surrender for interrogation; regular bail application considered after production.
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 FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933
Bail Appl..No. 4575 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.569/2010 OF CBCID/OCW-III, PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/ ACCUSED
--------------------------IMAMVEKS, THUNDIYIL VEEDU, THAMARASSERY, MAAKKAYIL, VELLUR.P.O, KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.V.V.RAJA
RESPONDENT(S): --------------STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA..
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
......................................... Bail Application No.4575 of 2011
Dated: 24.06.2011
ORDER
Petitioner, who is the 8th accused in Crime No.569/2010 of CBCID/OCW-III, Palakkad for non bailable offences, seeks anticipatory bail.
B.A. No. 4575/2011
-:2:-
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 24th day of June, 2011.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
sj
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail ought to be granted to the petitioner in view of the investigating officer having not yet interrogated him.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and OthersReferred¶2
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
IMAMVEKS
STATE OF KERALA
V. RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
