Allowed

Dittomon Alias Pappachan and Another v. the State and Another

Kerala HC20 Jul 2011Bail Appl./5157/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC to two accused facing charges of voluntarily causing hurt, assault, and criminal force. Bail subject to conditions, bond of Rs. 10,000, and prior compliance with appearance direction.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to bond of Rs. 10,000, two sureties, periodic reporting, and surrender for regular bail upon expiry.

Dittomon Alias Pappachan and Another Vs the State and Another — Quashing and FIR | 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 20TH JULY 2011 / 29TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5157 of 2011()

¶6

------------------------CRIME NO.630/2011 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS: ACCUSED :

¶8

¶9

DITTOMON ALIAS PAPPACHAN, S/O. KAILASAN, AMMELITHARAYIL HOUSE KEERIKKAD SOUTH MURI,KEERIKKAD VILLAGE P.O.KAYAMKULAM.

¶10

SANEESH ALIAS CHIKKU

¶11

S/O.GOPI, MARANGHATTU KANDATHIL,DO..DO..

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN

¶13

SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) SRI.M.A.AUGUSTINE

¶14

SRI.VARUGHESE CHERIAN

¶15

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE

¶16

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

¶17

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM.

¶18

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶21

Bail Appln.No.5157 of 2011

¶22

Dated this the 20^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 accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.630 of 2011 of Kayamkulam Police Station.

¶25

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 324, 354 and 452 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶26

The prosecution case is that on 05.06.2011, at 5.30 P.M., the accused persons forcibly entered into the tea shop run by the de facto complainant and attacked his wife and children with bricks and they sustained injuries.

¶27

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 06/07/2011, the following order was passed:

¶28

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

¶29

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioners

¶30

Bail Appln.No.5157/2011

¶31

: 2 :

¶32

should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 14th and 15th July, 2011.

¶33

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with the crime No.630 of 2011 of Kayamkulam Police Station till 23rd July, 2011.”

¶34

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 06/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶35

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 06/07/2011 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 for a period of two months on their 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:

¶36

Bail Appln.No.5157/2011

¶37

: 3 :

¶38

a) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

e) Before the expiry of the period mentioned above, the petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail.

¶43

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

¶44

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶45

above.

¶46

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE

¶47

skj

Dittomon Alias Pappachan and Another v. the State and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dittomon Alias Pappachan and Another v. the State and Another

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

Selvarajan Vs Puravankara Projects Ltd.

Vishnu Vs State of Kerala & Another

Jokuttan @ Scaria A.M. and Othres Vs the Station House Officer, Kelakam Polic

George Kutty Vs State of Kerala

Sekh Saraffaizudin @ Sarpharaj Vs State of Kerala

Solaman Vs State of Kerala