Allowed

Jayarajan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jan 2013Bail Appl./45/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed bail applications for petitioner Jayarajan accused under IPC sections 379, 411, etc., not stealing the case, he is an innocent passenger; numerous pending cases against him others have already been granted bail release on bail due to long custody and lack of risk of fleeing order were granted bail on stringent conditions including bond execution, report to investigati

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a bond with two sureties, reporting to the Investigating Officer weekly, and complying with conditions against leaving Kerala or tampering with evidence.

Jayarajan Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/27TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 45 of 2013 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 1187/2012 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4:-

¶8

JAYARAJAN,S/O.CHATHU,AGED 69 YEARS, ATTODIYIL HOUSE,KOLARATTU THERU, CHOMBALA,VATAKARA,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:-

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VATAKARA POLICE STATION,VATAKARA - 673 101 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA.T.Y.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-01-2013, ALONG WITH BA. 46/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sts

¶15

P. BHAVADASAN, J.

¶16

- - - - B.A. Nos. 45,46, 47, 48, 49 & 50 of 2013

¶17

Dated this the 17^th day of January, 2013.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petitioner is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 379, 411, 414, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 I.P.C.

¶20

The allegation against him is that he was found inside the vehicle which was alleged to be a stolen vehicle. The petitioner would say that he has nothing to do with the vehicle and he happened to be an innocent passenger in the vehicle. At any rate, he says that he has been in custody from 20.11.2012.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application by pointing out that several crimes are pending in different police stations against the petitioner. It is also pointed out that the investigation is not complete.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out that infact the persons who are accused of

¶23

B.A.45/2013 & con.cases.

¶24

¶25

having committed theft have already been granted bail by this court and the position of the petitioner is far better than those accused persons, especially when he has been in custody for a long period.

¶26

CD was made available for perusal.

¶27

After having heard learned counsel for the

¶28

petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and having perused the records, and after considering the various aspects especially the fact that some of the other accused who are accused of having committed theft have already been released on bail and also that the petitioner has been in custody from 20.11.2012 and since no apprehension is expressed by the investigating agency that if released on bail, the petitioner is likely to abscond, his continued custody appears to be unnecessary. Any apprehension expressed by the prosecution can be safeguarded by imposing stringent conditions.

¶29

B.A.45/2013 & con.cases.

¶30

¶31

Therefore, these applications are allowed on the

¶32

following conditions:

¶33

i) Petitioner shall be released on bail in each of the crimes on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of JFCM court concerned.

¶34

ii) The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts that are sought to be produced at the time of executing the bond.

¶35

iii) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer in the respective crimes on every Friday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. till final report is laid.

¶36

iv) Petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the Magistrate concerned.

¶37

v) Petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses.

¶38

B.A.45/2013 & con.cases.

¶39

¶40

vi) If any of the condition is violated, bail granted to the petitioner shall stand cancelled, and the JFCM concerned may take such steps as are available to him in law.

¶41

P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE

¶42

sb.

Jayarajan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayarajan 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

Jamnas Vs State of Kerala

P.P.Pratheeshan Vs State of Kerala

Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Maheen Kannu Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Hashif T.M. @ Asif Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Arshad Vs State of Kerala