Allowed

Rejula v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Oct 2011Bail Appl./7948/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was finally heard granting anticipatory bail to a female petitioner charged under Sections 498A, 294(b), 323 and 341 of IPC. The court allowed bail subject to execution of a bond with security and conditions against tampering with witnesses and committing further offences.

What did the court decide?

Bail application allowed; petitioner allowed to execute bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for like amount, subject to conditions of interrogation, no tampering with witnesses, and no furt

Rejula Vs the State of Kerala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2011 / 29TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 7948 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.793/2011 OF VADANAPPILLY POLICE STATION ....................

¶2

PETITIONER/SECOND ACCUSED : ------------------------------------REJULA, AGED 37, W/O.FATHAH, VALIYAKATH HOUSE, KOLOTHUMKADAVU, KURUMPILAVU P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)

¶3

RESPONDENT(S): STATE OF KERALA/COMPLAINANT

¶4

¶5

THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADANAPPILLY POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶6

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RENJITH

¶7

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶8

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

¶9

B.A.No.7948 of 2011

¶10

Dated this the 21st day of October, 2011

¶11

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

¶12

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.793 of 2011 of Vadanappilly Police Station, Thrissur District.

¶13

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 498A, 294(b), 323 and 341 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

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

¶15

Taking into account the facts and circumstances of

¶16

the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.

¶17

BA 7948/11

¶18

¶19

There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her 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:

¶20

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

¶21

B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ;

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated

above.

K.T.SANKARAN

JUDGE

csl

Rejula v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rejula v. the 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

Vinod P.George Vs State of Kerala

Sanal Kumar Vs S.I.of Police, Pothenkodu Police Station

Biju @ Vijesh Vs State of Kerala

Sanajayan Vs State

Sunil a.v.& Another Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh & Others Vs State