Allowed

Santhosh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Oct 2011Bail Appl./6738/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC to petitioners accused of Section 498-A IPC offences. Bail was allowed based on a settlement at the mediation centre, subject to standard conditions including appearance for interrogation and non-tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; petitioners to execute bond for `10,000/-` with sureties, appear for interrogation, not tamper with evidence or commit offences.

Santhosh Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2011 / 26TH ASWINA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6738 of 2011()

¶6

¶7

Crime No.590 of 2011 of Mavelikara Police Station.

¶8

PETITIONERS/A1 & A2

¶9

¶10

SANTHOSH KUMAR,MAMMOOTTIL HOUSE, KOTTARKAVU,MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶11

JANAMMA,MAMMOOTTIL HOUSE,

¶12

KOTTARKAVU,MAVELIKARA,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN

SRI.R.REJI

SMT.THARA THAMBAN

SRI.B.BIPIN

SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT

¶19

¶20

STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,REP. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶21

ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL

¶22

SMT.ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW

¶23

BY P.P.SRI.K.K.RAJEEV

¶24

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶26

B.A.No.6738 OF 2011

¶27

Dated this the 18^th day of October, 2011

¶28

ORDER

¶29

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.590 of 2011 of Mavelikara Police Station.

¶30

The offence alleged against the petitioners is under

¶31

Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶32

When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

¶33

25^th August, 2011, the following order was passed:

¶34

“It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant that if the case is posted before the Mediation Centre, the parties would be able to explore the possibilities of settlement. Post before the Mediation Centre. It is agreed by both parties that they will appear before the Mediation Centre on 2^nd September, 2011.

¶35

2. Post on 5^th September, 2011.

¶36

B.A.No.6738 OF 2011

¶37

¶38

There will be an interim order that the petitioners shall not be arrested in connection with Crime No.590 of 2011 of Mavelikara Police Station until the matter is considered by the Mediation Centre.”

¶39

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant submitted that the disputes between the parties were settled at the Mediation Centre and that the entire amount payable as per the terms of the settlement have been paid to the defacto complainant.

¶40

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, 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:

¶41

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

¶42

B.A.No.6738 OF 2011

¶43

¶44

B) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

¶45

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

¶46

D) The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation.

¶47

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

¶48

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

¶49

above.

¶50

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶51

cms

Santhosh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh Kumar 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

Sasi @ Raja Gopal Vs State of Kerala

Thankappan Vs State of Kerala

Thankachan Vs State of Kerala

Nidhin Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Zacharia Joseph Vs State Rep.by the Public Prosecutor

Nizamuddin Vs the State of Kerala