Allowed

Ratheesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Aug 2012Bail Appl./5191/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to a lorry driver accused of violating the Kerala Rationing Order. The court directed surrender within two weeks and imposed standard conditions including a bond, periodic appearance, and restrictions on leaving the state.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within two weeks, execution of a bond with sureties, and adherence to specified conditions including periodic appearance and prohibition on leaving Keral

Ratheesh 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 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2012/12TH SRAVANA 1934 Bail Appl..No. 5191 of 2012 () -----------------------------IN CRIME NO.1076/2012 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION

¶5

ACCUSED(S):

¶6

RATHEESH, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.HARIDASAN KRISHNANCHIRA VEEDU, THEVALAPPURAM P.O KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶7

BY ADVS.DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR

¶8

COMPLAINANT(S):

¶9

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PRPOSECUTOR

¶10

HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶11

ERNAKULAM KOCHI 682031.

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶13

KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN 691 571

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. JASMINE V.H.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶18

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 5191 OF 2012

¶19

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

¶20

Dated this the 03^rd day of August, 2012

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.1076/2012 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam. The offence alleged against him is under section 5(a) of the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966 r/w 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1965. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶23

The petitioner is the driver of the lorry. The lorry loaded with rice was kept in the house compound of one Fasaludheen. On that day, at about 8.00 PM, the police reached that compound and the lorry was examined. It was found containing rice which was supplied from the wholesale ration dealer. Since the lorry was kept in the house compound of A1, who used to transport wheat and other products from the FCI godown, he was stated to have been arrayed as accused. But it is stated that since he feigned

¶24

B.A.No.5191/2012

¶25

-2-

¶26

ignorance as to the content of the lorry kept in the compound, he was stated to have been granted bail.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is only a driver of the lorry. He only loads and transports articles as and when such offers come and as usual the rice was loaded in the lorry and since it was night, the lorry was kept in the house compound of A1. It is stated that he is not a licensee and he is only a poor driver. Instead of proceeding against the licensee, the police is proceeding against the poor driver of the lorry, he contends.

¶28

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶29

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

¶30

B.A.No.5191/2012

¶31

-3-

¶32

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 learned Magistrate. 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.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

B.A.No.5191/2012

¶36

-4-

¶37

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.

¶38

e. The accused shall not leave the state of Kerala without the prior 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

Sd/- N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶41

¶42

//True copy//

¶43

P.A. to Judge

Ratheesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ratheesh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joy C.P Vs State of Kerala

Muthu Thangal Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Rajendran Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Harish Babu Maddineni Vs State of Kerala

K.T.Gopinathan Vs State of Kerala

Jossie Catherine Vs State of Kerala