Allowed

Rajesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jun 2012Bail Appl./2630/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted bail to the applicant, a second accused in a case under Sections 324, 326, and 308 IPC. Bail was subject to surrender within 10 days for interrogation, execution of a bond with sureties, appearance on specific days, and restrictions on leaving Kerala or tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to surrendering for interrogation, executing bond with sureties, appearing periodically, and complying with movement restrictions.

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala — 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 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/14TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl.No. 2630 of 2012 (C)

¶6

CRIME NO.133/2012 OF MANKARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶7

APPLICANT/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

RAJESH, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. LAKSHMANAN, KOOTUPURA HOUSE, KANNAMPARIYARAM, MANKARA, PALAKKAD.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)

¶10

SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT :

¶12

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

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SREEJITH.V.S.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

RKM

¶16

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶17

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 2630 OF 2012

¶18

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

¶19

Dated this the 04^th day of June, 2012

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.133/2012 of Mankara Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged against him are under sections 324, 326 and 308 r/w 149 of IPC.

¶22

The other accused were already granted bail by the Sessions Judge. Considering the gravity of the offences, the petitioner's request for anticipatory bail was rightly dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. It is alleged that the incident took place at 6 PM on 11.03.2012. It is stated that the defacto complainant and his elder brother went to the house of the accused person to enquire about the quarrel among them and at that time the accused attacked the complainant. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact, the petitioner sustained injury as he was attacked by the complainant and others. He had

¶23

B.A.No.2630/2012

¶24

-2-

¶25

sustained injury on his forehead. It is seen that when he was examined, he was under the influence of alcohol.

¶26

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶27

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:

¶28

a. The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five 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.

¶29

B.A.No.2630/2012

¶30

-3-

¶31

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, Wednesdays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶32

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. 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.

¶33

B.A.No.2630/2012

¶34

-4-

¶35

e. The accused and the sureties shall not leave the state of Kerala without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate.

¶36

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

¶37

Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶38

¶39

//True copy//

¶40

P.A. to Judge

Rajesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh 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

Kannan Vs State of Kerala

Ponnappan Vs State of Kerala

Sadiq Mohammed Ameer Vs State of Kerala

Jobin.J.B Vs State of Kerala

Akhil Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Kumar.S Vs State of Kerala