Allowed

Binoy v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Dec 2012Bail Appl./8454/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application for three accused persons. The de facto complainant stated the accused names were recorded by mistake in the assailants' list. The court ordered surrender, bail execution, and standard conditions against tampering or witness influence.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; surrender by 12.12.2012; release on Rs.15,000 bond with two solvent sureties each.

Binoy 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 P.BHAVADASAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/13TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8454 of 2012 ()

¶6

(CRIME NO. 452/2012 OF KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1-3:

¶8

1. BINOY,, AGED 35 YEARS

¶9

S/O KURIAKOSE, RESIDING AT ARITHADATHIL HOUSE

¶10

THETTEKKAD BHAGAM, MANNUTHUR KARA

¶11

THIRUMARADI VILLAG,E MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, 686662

¶12

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT

¶13

2. PRADEEP,, AGED 33 YEARS

¶14

S/O KRISHNAN PAPU, RESIDING AT MANTHADATHIL VEETTIL MANNUTHUR KARA, KOOTHATTUKULAM, 686662

¶15

ERNAKULAM DISTICT

¶16

3. REJI,AGED 35 YEARS,

¶17

S/O THOMAS, RESIDING AT MAZHUKUNNEL VEETIL MANNUTHUR KARA, THIRUMARADI VILLAGE, KOOTHATTUKULAM 686662, ERNAKULAM DISTICT

¶18

BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

¶19

RESPONDENT/STATE AND DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶20

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERLA, ERNKULAM, COCHIN 682031 REPRESENTED BY INVESTIGATING OFFICER IN CRIME NO 452/2012 OF KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION

¶21

2. LIBIN,

¶22

S/O SUNNY, RESIDING AT MULANTHANATH VEETIL KISHKOMBU KARA, KOOTHATTUKULAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, 68662

¶23

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAMAPRASAD UNNI.T.

¶24

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COE UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

dlk

¶26

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

¶27

---------------------------------------------------BA No.8454 of 2012 ---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 4^th day of December 2012

¶28

Order

¶29

As per the instruction of this Court, the defacto complainant has been impleaded as the second respondent in this case, who appeared through counsel. The learned counsel for the petitioners made available a statement said to have been filed by the defacto complainant before the JFCM, Muvattupuzha, which shows that the names of the petitioners were mentioned in the list of assailants, by mistake. According to the defacto complainant, the petitioners had no role in the incident to play.

¶30

In the aforementioned facts and

¶31

circumstances, the application is only to be allowed. The application is accordingly allowed as follows :

¶32

The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 12.12.2012, who, after interrogation, shall produce them before the JFCM concerned.

¶33

BA 8454/12 2

¶34

On applications being filed by the petitioners before the JFCM concerned, they shall be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the JFCM concerned.

¶35

The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties before granting bail to the petitioners.

¶36

The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him, till final report is filed.

¶37

The petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.

¶38

If any of the conditions is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the JFCM concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such steps as are available to him in law.

¶39

P.Bhavadasan, Judge

¶40

sta

¶41

BA 8454/12 3

Binoy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binoy 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

Stephen P.Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

Binu Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Nissam Vs State of Kerala

Anuroop.K.K. Vs State of Kerala

Ali Akbar Vs the Sub Inspector of Police