Allowed

Shaji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jun 2012Bail Appl./3772/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, admitting bail applications of accused involved in a communal violence case, granted bail on conditions including surrender within 10 days, bond execution, non-bailment, identity verification, and a deposit of Rs. 3,000 each per Hemanth Kumar.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners granted bail on conditions of surrender within 10 days, bond execution, daily appearance for interrogation, passport production, affidavit of non-contamination, and deposit of Rs. 3,00

Shaji 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

FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/25TH JYAISHTA 1934S

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3772 of 2012 ()

¶6

(CRIME NO.89/2012 OF RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTICT)

¶7

PETITINERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. SHAJI, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O THOMAS,

¶9

KUDIYIRICKAL HOUSE, MAMMALASSERY P.O

¶10

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶11

2. AJITH, AGED 28 YEARS,

¶12

S/O JOSEPH, THEMMANAYIL HOUSE,

¶13

MAMMALASSERY P.O

¶14

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶15

3. ROBIN,, AGED 25 YEARS

¶16

S/O MATHAI, MANALEL HOUSE,

¶17

MAMMALASSERY P.O

¶18

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶19

4. RAJU,, AGED 48 YEARS S/O VARGHESE,PERIYAPLACKAL HOUSE,

¶20

MAMMALASSERY P.O,

¶21

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶22

5. BIJU,, AGED 38 YEARS

¶23

S/O POULOSE, MOOLAKKUNNEL HOUSE,

¶24

MAMMALASSERY P.O

¶25

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶26

6. VARGHESE,, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O THOMAS, THUNNAL HOUSE, KIZHUMURY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTIRCT

¶27

7. JOSE,, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O CHACKO, MOOLAKKUNNEL,

¶28

VAZHEPARAMBIL HOUSE, MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶29

8. CHERIYAN,, AGED 45 YEARS,S/O IPE,

¶30

KUNNATHUPUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE,

¶31

MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶32

¶33

Bail Appl..No. 3772 of 2012 ()

¶34

9. POULOSE,, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MARKOSE, THEKKEPALLIPATTIL HOUSE MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶35

10. BABY,, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, PUTHUKUDISSERY HOUSE, MAMMALASSERY P.O

¶36

11. JOCOB MATHEW @ JOKKUTTY,, AGED 54 YEARS MANGALATH HOUSE, ANCHALPETTY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶37

12. GIBI,, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, THADATHIL HOUSE, MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶38

13. MATHAI,, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O MARKOSE, TEKKEPALLIPATTIL HOUSE MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DSITRICT

¶39

14. MATHAI,, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O PAILY, MANALEL HOUSE, MAMMALASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶40

BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV

¶41

SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN

¶42

RESPONDENTS & STATE:

¶43

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNALULAM (CRIME NO 89/2012 OF RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682031

¶44

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT (CRIME NO 89/ 2012 OF RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)

¶45

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶46

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMSSION ON 15-06-2012, ALONG WITH BA. 3978/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶47

¶48

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶49

B.A.Nos.3772 and 3978 of 2012

¶50

Dated this the 15^th day of June, 2012

¶51

Order

¶52

The petitioners are some of the accused in Crime No.89 of 2012 of Ramamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 143, 145, 147, 149, 153A, 188, 341, 332 and 427 IPC and Section 3(1) of the P.D.P.P.Act. It is alleged that the petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing offences on account of a feud between Orthodox and Jacobite christian factions at Mammalassery Mar Mikhail Church. When the police reached there, the petitioners attacked the police party. They pelted stones against the police men and hit the police jeep and destroyed the beacon light of the jeep. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is A22 who threw stone against the police officials causing hurt but he has already been granted regular bail.

¶53

Considering all the aspects, the following directions are issued:

¶54

BA Nos.3772 & 3978/12

¶55

¶56

The petitioners 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 petitioners but on the following conditions:

¶57

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.

¶58

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

¶59

c. The accused shall produce their original passports before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If they are not having any valid passport, they should file an affidavit regarding the same

¶60

BA Nos.3772 & 3978/12

¶61

¶62

before the Magistrate.

¶63

d. The accused will also file affidavit that they will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that they will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case

¶64

and that they 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

¶65

to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶66

e. The accused shall not leave the State of Kerala without permission of the court.

¶67

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

¶68

g. The petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.3000/- each in

¶69

the light of the decision of this court in Hemanth Kumar v. S.I. of Police (ILR 2011(4) Ker. 261)

¶70

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶71

srd

Shaji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surendran Vs George Varkey

Jayan I.D. Vs P.G.Hanifa

Junaid Ali @ Junais Vs State of Kerala

G.Mohanan Vs State of Kerala

Sunny Vs State of Kerala

Jose Paul Vs Circle Inspector of Police, Angamaly