Allowed

Eldo K.David v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Oct 2011Bail Appl./6413/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of offences under IPC Sections 403, 406, 408, 418, and 477A, noting his compliance with the prior interim order to appear before the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

The Bail Application was allowed; the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail subject to specific conditions of reporting, cooperation, and abstaining from prejudicial activities.

Eldo K.David 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 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6413 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.203/2011 OF NEMMARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DT.

¶6

PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED

¶7

¶8

ELDO K. DAVID, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. DAVID, ATHITHOTTIL HOUSE, PANANKOORA, KAIRADY, NEMMARA, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.K.SANDEEP

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶16

B.A.No.6413 of 2011

¶17

Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011

¶18

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.203 of 2011 of Nemmara Police Station, Palakkad District.

¶19

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 403, 406, 408, 418 and 477A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on

¶21

12.10.2011, the following order was passed :

¶22

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

¶23

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before

¶24

BA 6413/11

¶25

¶26

considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 17th and 18th October, 2011.

¶27

Post on 21st October, 2011.

¶28

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.203 of 2011 of Nemmara Police Station, Palakkad District, till 25th October, 2011.

¶29

The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any.

¶30

The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.”

¶31

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶32

as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 12.10.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner.

¶33

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

¶34

BA 6413/11

¶35

¶36

case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 12.10.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.

¶37

There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for ` 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions :

¶38

A) The petitioner 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;

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

BA 6413/11

¶43

¶44

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

¶45

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶46

above.

¶47

K.T.SANKARAN

¶48

JUDGE csl

Eldo K.David v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eldo K.David 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

Sanajayan Vs State

Sunil a.v.& Another Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh & Others Vs State

Abdullakutty Vs State of Kerala

T.P.Sajeev Vs Circle Inspector of Police

Prakash Kumar Vs State of Kerala