Allowed

Aravind & Others v. State of Kerala & Another

Kerala HC19 Nov 2011Bail Appl./6732/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 1-4 in a case involving offences under Sections 498A and 326 IPC. The High Court noted that the dispute between the parties was settled through Kerala Mediation Centre and directed police to release them on executing bond if arrested.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; direction to release accused on executing bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two solvent sureties.

Aravind & Others Vs State of Kerala & Another — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

SATURDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6732 of 2011()

¶6

----------------------------CRIME NO.389/2011 OF PULIKEEZH POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS (S): ACCUSED 1 TO 4

¶8

¶9

ARAVIND R KUMAR @ UNNIKRISHNAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.REJI KUMAR, SANTHI NIKETHAN, NIRANAM.P.O, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

ASHA R. KUMAR, W/O. REJIKUMAR, AGED 50 YEARS, SANTHI NIKETHAN, NIRANAM.P.O, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶11

ANJU.R, D/O. REJI KUMAR, AGED 21 YEARS, SANTHI NIKETHAN, NIRANAM.P.O, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶12

PRASANNAKUMARAN PILLAI, AGED 59 YEARS, MANAPURATH HOUSE, NIRANAM.P.O, KADAPRA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE SRI.BIJO THOMAS GEORGE

¶14

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶15

¶16

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I OF POLICE, PULIKEEZH POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶17

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.REMA

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶20

B.A.No.6732 of 2011

¶21

Dated this the 19^th day of November, 2011

¶22

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.389 of 2011 of Pulikeezh Police Station, Pathanamthitta District.

¶23

The offences alleged against the accused were under Sections 498A and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Later, the offence under Section 326 IPC was deleted.

¶24

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 26^th August, 2011, the following order was passed :

¶25

“Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant submitted that the case may be posted before the Kerala Mediation Center so that the

¶26

¶27

BA 6732/11

¶28

parties would be able to settle the disputes and differences among them. It is submitted by both parties that the first petitioner and the de facto complainant will be present before the Mediation Center on 2nd September, 2011.

¶29

There will be an interim direction not to arrest the petitioners in connection with Crime No.389 of 2011 of Pulikeezh Police Station, Pathanamthitta District, till the matter is considered by the Mediation Center.”

¶30

It is reported by the Director of Kerala Mediation Center that the matter was settled between the parties. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner and the de facto complainant are living together now.

¶31

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and also taking note of the fact that the matter was settled between the parties, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

¶32

There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the

¶33

BA 6732/11

¶34

¶35

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.

¶36

Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed.

¶37

K.T.SANKARAN

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

csl

Aravind & Others v. State of Kerala & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aravind & Others v. State of Kerala & Another

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

Asanar Vs State of Kerala

Sachu Vs State of Kerala

Manikuttan Vs State of Kerala

K.T.Muhammed Vs State of Kerala

Ravi.G.Nair Vs State of Kerala

Jamaludhin Vs State of Kerala