Allowed

C.Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jul 2011Bail Appl./5195/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, accused of employing children for hazardous work. Relief was conditioned on ensuring police interrogation, non-influencing of witnesses, surrendering before magistrate expiry of bail period, and compliance with terms.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted for two months on executing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to specific conditions including surrender before magistrate upon expiry.

C.Ramakrishnan 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

FRIDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2011 / 24TH ASHADHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5195 of 2011

¶6

CRIME NO.808 OF 2011 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR.

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------C.RAMAKRISHNAN, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 63 YEARS, CHANGARANGATH HOUSE, PULLAZHI VILLAGE, PULLAZHI P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶9

RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (CRIME NO.808/2011 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT).

¶10

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶13

B.A. NO. 5195 OF 2011

¶14

Dated this the 15^th day of July, 2011

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.808 of 2011 of Thrissur Town East Police Station.

¶17

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 23 and 26 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

¶18

The prosecution case is that the petitioner engaged in his hotel two boys aged below 18 years for the purpose of hazardous employment.

¶19

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 4^th July, 2011, the following directions were issued:

¶20

“4. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the

¶21

B.A. NO.5195 OF 2011

¶22

:: 2 ::

¶23

view that an opportunity should be afforded to the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer.

¶24

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on 11^th and 12^th of July, 2011. Post on 15^th July, 2011.”

¶25

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 4^th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner.

¶26

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 4.7.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail for a period of two months on his executing bond for Rupees Ten thousand with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶27

B.A. NO.5195 OF 2011

¶28

:: 3 ::

¶29

a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

¶30

b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶35

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶36

ahz/

C.Ramakrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Ramakrishnan 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

Sunil Kumar C. Vs State of Kerala

Shajeev and Another Vs State of Kerala

Janardhanan Vs the Station House Officer, Police Statio

Mahesh and Another Vs State of Kerala

Sameer Vs State of Kerala

Johny Vs State of Kerala