Partly allowed

Bijeesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jul 2011Bail Appl./4882/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 CrPC was dismissed for petitioner-accused 1 and 2 due to the nature of the offence and grievous injury caused. Bail was allowed to petitioner-accused 3 subject to conditions and surrendering for regular bail after filing the final police report.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for the 3rd petitioner/accused upon execution of bond with sureties and surrender for regular bail; dismissed for the 1st and 2nd petitioners.

Bijeesh Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2011 / 15TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4882 of 2011()

¶6

---------------------------------------CRIME NO.194/2011 OF SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT --------------------------

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

------------------------

¶9

1. BIJEESH, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 25, KUNNIKKATTU HOUSE, THINKALKADU, MUNIYARA P.O.

¶10

2. PRADEEP, AGED 22, S/O.KUTTIAPPAN, KUNNIKKATTU HOUSE, PACHADY P.O., UMMAKKADA, NEDUMKANDOM.

¶11

3. BINEESH @ DINESH, S/O.THOMAS, KUNNIKKATTU HOUSE, THINKALKADU, MUNIYARA P.O.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH

¶13

RESPONDENT(S):

¶14

--------------------------

¶15

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶16

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION.

¶17

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

sts

¶20

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶21

B.A. No.4882 OF 2011

¶22

Dated this the 6^th day of July, 2011

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.194 of 2011 of the Santhanpara Police Station, Idukki District.

¶25

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 452, 294(b), 506(i), 323, 324, 326 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶26

The prosecution case is that on 2.5.2011 at 7 P.M., the accused persons criminally trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked the inmates therein and outraged the modesty of the daughter of the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant sustained fracture on his forearm.

¶27

B.A. No.4882 OF 2011 2

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the second accused sustained injuries and that the case was foisted against the petitioners.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶30

The injury sustained by the de facto complainant is grievous in nature. The overt acts are attributed against accused Nos.1 and 2. However, there is no allegation of any overt act in the matter of physical assault as against the 3^rd accused.

¶31

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the injury sustained and other circumstances, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2. However, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused.

¶32

B.A. No.4882 OF 2011 3

¶33

There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail for a period of one month on his executing bond for `10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶34

A) The 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶35

B) The 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶36

C) The 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶37

D) The 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail.

¶38

E) Before the expiry of the period mentioned above,the 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail.

¶39

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

¶40

B.A. No.4882 OF 2011 4

¶41

The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 2/accused Nos.1 and 2 and it is allowed to the extent indicated above, in so far as it relates to the 3^rd petitioner/3^rd Accused.

¶42

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶43

cms

Bijeesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijeesh 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

Shailaja Vs State of Kerala

Jose @ Joby Mathew Vs the State of Kerala

Prajith P.C. Vs State of Kerala

Paul M.P. Vs State of Kerala and Another

Robin Lawrence Vs State of Kerala

Shijo Vs State of Kerala