Disposed

Jayaseelan v. Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC21 May 2012Bail Appl./2605/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the accused to surrender within 10 days. Bail may be granted by the Magistrate only if the accused executes a bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties, appears for interrogation, produces passport, and abides by strict conditions regarding movement and tampering.

What did the court decide?

Direction to surrender within 10 days and conditional empowerment of Magistrate to grant bail subject to strict surety and conduct conditions.

Jayaseelan Vs Sub Inspector of Police — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2012/31ST VAISAKHA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2605 of 2012 ()

¶6

CRIME NO.226/2012 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION.

¶7

PETITIONER:ACCUSED

¶8

----------- ----------------------

¶9

JAYASEELAN, AGED 43 S/O. PARAMESWARAN ACHARI, T.C.3/1385, LNJ-19 PATTOM P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI

¶11

RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT

¶12

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION,

¶13

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 607

¶14

2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZHAKUTTOM, THIRUVANANTHAURAM. 695 582.

¶15

3. DY.S.P OF POLICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 101.

¶16

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 680 31.

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

tss

¶20

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶21

B.A.No.2605 of 2012

¶22

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2012

¶23

Order

¶24

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.226 of 2012 of Mangalapuram Police Station. He was the manager of the jewellery owned by the complainant. The allegation made against him is that he had misappropriated or taken away 7.5 kg. of gold and started a new jewellery shop somewhere near to the jewellery conducted by the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on an earlier occasion the petitioner approached this court for police protection against the complainant. The learned counsel further submits that since there was harassment by the police, he also filed another petition before this court and it was after receipt of notice in that petition, the complainant approached the police with the complaint, based on which the present crime was registered against the petitioner, which according to the petitioner, would show the falsity of the allegations made by the complainant. The learned counsel submits that the allegations were raised against him three years

¶25

BA 2605/12

¶26

¶27

after he left the company of the complainant and that itself will show that he wanted to wreck vengeance only because the petitioner had started a new jewellery business.

¶28

I am not entering into the merits of the contentions raised. Considering all the aspects, the following directions are issued:

¶29

The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. When applied for bail by the accused, the learned Magistrate can, considering the nature of the case, grant bail to the petitioner but on the following conditions:

¶30

a) The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties.

¶31

BA 2605/12 3

¶32

b) The accused shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and that he should appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶33

c) The accused shall produce his original passport before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate.

¶34

d) The accused will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶35

e)The accused and the sureties shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without the prior

¶36

BA 2605/12

¶37

¶38

permission of the learned Magistrate.

¶39

f) The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc.

¶40

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶41

srd

¶42

BA 2605/12 5

Jayaseelan v. Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayaseelan v. Sub Inspector of Police

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

St.Mathews Convent Vs Varkey Mathai

Shake Hussain Ahammed Rawther Vs Gouriamma Rajamma

Mohanan Vs State of Kerala

Swamy Himaval Maheswara Badrananda Vs State of Kerala

Saheer Vs State of Kerala