Allowed

Sunil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jul 2011Bail Appl./5185/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. Petitioners, accused of public assembly offences, were directed to appear for interrogation. Bail was granted subject to conditions including reporting monthly, ensuring witness contact, and surrendering for regular bail upon filing of the police report.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted anticipatory bail for two months on bond Rs 10,000 with sureties, subject to conditions of reporting, interrogation, non-influence of witnesses, and regular bail after investigatio

Sunil 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 K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5185 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.223/11 OF PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2 TO 6 :

¶7

¶8

SUNIL, S/O.GOPALAN, AGED 31, ASWATHI VILASAM, VATTAYAM, KIZHAKKANELA MURI, PALLICKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 574.

¶9

SANTHOSH, S/O.GOPALAN, AGED 28, ASWATHI VILASAM, VATTAYAM, KIZHAKKANELA MURI, PALLICKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 574.

¶10

ANANDAN, S/O.KUNJIRAMAN, AGED 43, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, MUTHIYAKONAM, KIZHAKKANELA MURI, PALLICKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 574.

¶11

SANTHOSH, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, AGED 22, MUKKAMKODE COLONY, KIZHAKKANELA MURI, PALLICKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 574.

¶12

ANILKUMAR, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, AGED 24, MUKKAMKODE COLONY, KIZHAKKANELA MURI, PALLICKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 574.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH

¶14

RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

¶16

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.223/11 OF PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DIST).

¶17

BA 5185/2011

¶18

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, PARIPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM-691 574.

¶19

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶22

B.A.No.5185 of 2011

¶23

Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos. 2 to 6 in Crime No.223 of 2011 of Parippally Police Station.

¶26

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143,147, 148, 452, 323, 324 and 294(b) read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶27

3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on

¶28

5.7.2011, the following order was passed :

¶29

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

¶30

Taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations made

¶31

BA 5185/2011

¶32

¶33

by the petitioners against the brother of the de facto complainant, I think the prayer for anticipatory bail requires to be granted. At the same time, I think before granting the prayer for anticipatory bail, the petitioners should be directed to appear before the investigating officer.

¶34

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 13.7.2011. Post on 18.7.2011.

¶35

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with the crime till 20^th July, 2011 .”

¶36

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 5.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶37

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 5.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can

¶38

BA 5185/2011 3

¶39

be granted to the petitioners.

¶40

There will be a direction that in the event of 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/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions :

¶41

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

¶42

B) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required .

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

BA 5185/2011

¶47

¶48

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

¶49

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

above.

K.T.SANKARAN

JUDGE

csl

Sunil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil 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

Mahesh and Another Vs State of Kerala

Sameer Vs State of Kerala

C.Ramakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Roopan Vs State of Kerala

Krishna Prasad Vs State of Kerala

Rameshkumar Vs State of Kerala