Disposed

Sreekanth v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Oct 2012Crl.MC/3221/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal Misc. Case, the High Court of Kerala issued a direction to the Sessions Judge to consider the petitioner's bail application expeditiously on the date of his surrender, provided he surrendered within two weeks. The Court directed the judge to be notified by the petitioner in advance.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to Sessions Judge to consider bail application expeditiously on date of petitioner's surrender within two weeks.

Sreekanth 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 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/26TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 3221 of 2012 (C)

¶6

-------------------------IN SC.442/2010 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, PATHANAMTHITTA

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED IN CRIME:852/02 : -

¶8

SREEKANTH, S/O.RAJAGOPALAN , 'PUSHPAVILASAM', MAHATTIKAVALA, PADINJATTUSSERY, KAVIYOOR (VIA), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:-

¶11

THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. R. RANJITH

¶13

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Crl.MC.No. 3221 of 2012 (C)

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

¶17

ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 852/2002 DATED 17.12.2002.

¶18

ANNEXURE 2 : TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET NO. 87/2003 IN FIR NO.852/02 DATED 28.02.2003.

¶19

ANNEXURE 3 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN S.C. NO.89/2006 ON THE FILE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-II) PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 01.07.2010.

¶20

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL.

// TRUE COPY //

P.A. TO JUDGE

DMR/-

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,J.

¶25

Crl.M.C. NO. 3221 of 2012

¶26

Dated this the 18^th day of October, 2012

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Petitioner is one among the accused in a split up case numbered as S.C. No.442 of 2010 on the file of the Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta. Learned counsel submits that the case on transmission from the Sessions court is now pending on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track-II), Pathanamthitta.

¶29

When the trial proceeded previously the case

¶30

numbered as S.C. No.89 of 2006 on the file of the above court, petitioner and two other accused remained at large, and on completion of the trial against the accused who had appeared the case against the accused persons who evaded trial (A1, A6 and A8) was split up and renumbered as S.C. No. 442 of 2010. Limited prayer canvassed by the counsel for petitioner is for issue of a direction to the learned Sessions Judge to consider his bail application on the date of

¶31

Crl.M.C. NO. 3221 of 2012

¶32

¶33

his surrender. Learned counsel submits that to have an employment for his livelihood he left the country while the trial of the case proceeded earlier. At present a non bailable warrant issued by the court is pending against him for execution, is the further submission of the counsel. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, the following direction is issued.

¶34

In case, the petitioner surrenders before the Sessions Judge within a period of two weeks from the date of this order and advance notice on his bail application has been given to the Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor, learned Sessions Judge shall consider such application, expeditiously, preferably, on the date of his surrender, if not prevented by any exceptional circumstance.

¶35

I make it clear that the direction given as above shall not be construed as placing any impediment to the magistrate in deciding the bail application on its merits in accordance with law. It is further clarified that proceedings, if any, initiated against the petitioner with respect to forfeiture of

¶36

Crl.M.C. NO. 3221 of 2012

¶37

¶38

bond, if any, previously executed by the petitioner, if that be

¶39

so, can be continued and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶40

Crl.M.C. is disposed of.

¶41

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE.

¶42

DMR /-

Sreekanth v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekanth 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

V.S.Jeevakumar Vs the Inspector of Factories & Boilers Gr

Vijesh Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Bimal Vs the State of Kerala

Damodaran P. Vs Renu v.Nampoothiri

Mohan Das Vs State of Kerala

Jayakumar Vs Excise Range Inspector