Allowed

Jayan Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Aug 2011Bail Appl./5637/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to accused No.1 and 2 involved in forgery and passport abuse offenses, conditioned on executing a bond and complying with police reporting and interrogation requirements.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and conditions to report, appear for interrogation, and not tamper with evidence.

Jayan Krishnan 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 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5637 of 2011

¶6

CRIME NO.328 OF 2011 OF POTHENCODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2

¶8

¶9

JAYAN KRISHNAN, S/O.RUGMINI, VALIYAPUTHEN VEEDU, CHANTHAVILA, KATTAIKONAM, POTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

AJU KRISHNAN, S/O.RUGMINI, VALIYAPUTHEN VEEDU, CHANTHAVILA, KATTAIKONAM, POTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE

¶12

RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT

¶13

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POTHENCODE POLICE STATION.

¶15

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶18

Bail Appl. NO. 5637 OF 2011

¶19

Dated this the 10^th day of August, 2011

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1and 2 in Crime No.328 of 2011 of Pothencode Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District.

¶22

The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(c) and 12(b) of the Passport Act.

¶23

When the Bail Application came up for admission on 29^th July, 2011, the following order was passed:

¶24

“4. 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 should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the

¶25

B.A. NO. 5637 OF 2011

¶26

:: 2 ::

¶27

petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 4^th and 5^th August, 2011.

¶28

Post on 10^th August, 2011.

¶29

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.328 of 2011 of Pothencode Police Station, till 10^th August, 2011. ”

¶30

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 29^th July, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners.

¶31

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 29^th July, 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 on their executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶32

B.A. NO. 5637 OF 2011

¶33

:: 3 ::

¶34

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;

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶40

(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge

¶41

ahz/

Jayan Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayan Krishnan 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

Anuraj and 3 Others Vs State of Kerala

Natarajan Vs State of Kerala and Another

Manu Vs State of Kerala

Anu K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Febin and Others Vs State of Kerala

Saraswathy and Others Vs State of Kerala and Another