Single-judge High Court of Kerala order denying anticipatory bail to a 4th accused in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case due to lack of police interrogation, directing surrender for interrogation with options for regular bail application thereafter.
Anticipatory bail denied; direction to surrender for interrogation.
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
WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2011 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1933
Bail Appl..No. 5379 of 2011()
-----------------------------
CRIME NO. 554/2011 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT
APPLICANT/4TH ACCUSED
---------------------------------------
RENEESH. N. C., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. CHANDRAN, NELLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULLAZHI P. O., PULLAZHI VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK.
BY ADVS. SRI. P. VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN SRI. UNNI SEBASTIAN KAPPAN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
-------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. R. REMA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
PN
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
......................................... Bail Application No.5379 of 2011
Dated: 21.12.2011
ORDER
Petitioner, who is the 4th accused in Crime No.554/2011 of Thrissur Town East Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail.
B.A. No.5379/ 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.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
sj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the 4th accused in cases involving criminal breach of trust and cheating.
Whether the investigating officer has the advantage of interrogating the petitioner before bail is granted.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and OthersExplained¶3
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
RENEESH. N. C.
STATE OF KERALA
V.RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
