Allowed

Vijayan.M.v. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Aug 2012Bail Appl./5578/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, first accused in an assault case, by issuing directions to the judicial magistrate to grant bail subject to strict conditions including surrender, appearance at interrogation, and execution of a bond.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the judicial magistrate to grant bail to the petitioner subject to specific conditions including surrender, reporting, and bonding.

Vijayan.M.v. 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

THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012/18TH SRAVANA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5578 of 2012 () -----------------------------(CRIME NO.458/2012 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT)

¶6

PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

¶7

VIJAYAN.M.V., AGED 53 YEARS D/O.KUNHAPPU, RESIDING AT PILICODE, VARAKOT VAYAL P.O.PILICODE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶10

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING S.H.O.CHANDERA POLICE STATION KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶11

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. JASMINE V.H.

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

SCL.

¶14

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶15

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

¶16

B.A. No. 5578 of 2012

¶17

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

¶18

Dated this the 9^th day of August, 2012

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.458/2012 of Chandera Police Station, Kasargod District. The offences alleged against him are under sections 323, 326 r/w 34 IPC. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶21

It is stated that this petitioner along with other accused persons attacked the complainant and inflicted grievous hurt with a stone.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a dispute with regard to the pathway. Wife of the first accused was attacked by the defacto complainant, in respect of which Crime No.457/2012 was registered alleging offences under Sections 323, 324, 354 and 294(b) r/w 34 IPC.

¶23

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶24

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

¶25

B.A. No. 5578 of 2012

¶26

¶27

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 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.

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

B.A. No. 5578 of 2012

¶32

¶33

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.

¶34

e. The accused shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate.

¶35

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

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶38

Scl.

¶39

True Copy

¶40

PA to Judge

Vijayan.M.v. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayan.M.v. 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

Vincent Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Vs State of Kerala

Sadanandan Vs State of Kerala

Jayan @ Baiju Vs State of Kerala

Muneer Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Mujeeb Rahiman N.V. Vs the State of Kerala