Allowed

P.P.Pratheeshan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Jan 2013Bail Appl./53/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to five accused persons accused of offences under IPC Sections 143, 147, 148, and 332 r/w 149 for preventing a UD clerk from discharging his duty. The court noted the absence of specific illegal mining allegations against the petitioners in the copy of documents provided.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender before 23.1.2013, bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, bi-weekly appearance, and non-tampering with evidence.

P.P.Pratheeshan Vs State of Kerala — Corruption | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/26TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 53 of 2013 ()

¶6

(CRIME NO. 739/2012 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT)

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NUMBERS 1 TO 5:

¶8

1. P.P.PRATHEESHAN,AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN,PUTHIYAPARAMBATH HOUSE, MUCHUKUNNU, KOILANDY TALUK.

¶9

2. ANAZ U.V., AGED 28 YEARS,S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, ACHANVEETTIL HOUSE,P.O.PURAKKAD, VIA. PAYYOLI KOYILANDY TALUK.

¶10

3. NAZAR U.K., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.MAMMAD HAJI,OORALIKANDIYIL HOUSE, NOW RESIDING AT KIDANJIYIL HOUSE,PO.PURAKKAD, VIA. PAYYOLI, KOYILANDY TALUK.

¶11

4. BASHEER C., AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.KUNHAMMED,CHARUMMAL HOUSE,

¶12

NOW RESIDING AT MELOTH THAZHA HOUSE, P.O.MUCHUKUNNU, KOYILANDY TALUK.

¶13

5. SASI P.M., AGED 41 YEARS, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN,PUTHIYOTTUMEETHAL HOUSE,PO PURAKKAD, VIA. PAYYOLI,KOYILANDY TALUK.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J.

¶15

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶16

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,REPRESENTING SI OF POLICE, KOYILANDY POLICE STATION.

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Kss

¶20

P.BHAVADASAN, J.

¶21

--------------------------------------------B.A. No.53 of 2013

¶22

Dated this the 16^th day of January, 2013

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioners are accused in Crime No.739/2012 of Koyilandy Police Station, who are alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148 & 332 r/w 149 of IPC.

¶25

Allegation against the petitioners is that on 7.12.2012 on coming to know about a lorry loading illegally mined sand, it was intercepted by the local people and the matter was informed to the UD clerk, the de facto complaint, who came to the scene. Further allegation is that he was threatened and prevented from discharging his duty and the lorry was taken away.

¶26

The petitioners would say that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. The story has been cooked up to wreak vengeance against them.

¶27

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition pointing out that investigation is not yet complete.

¶28

CD was made available for perusal. On a perusal of the CD, significantly there is no allegation that the petitioners have committed the offences involving illegal mining of sand. The only allegation is that they prevented the UD clerk from

¶29

B.A.No.53/2013 :2:

¶30

doing his duty.

¶31

After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and after having perused the records, it is felt that this is a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioners. The petition is allowed as follows:

¶32

i. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 23.1.2013 who after interrogation shall produce them before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's court concerned, which court on application being moved by the petitioners shall release them on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the JFCM concerned.

¶33

ii. The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts, before granting bail.

¶34

iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Tuesday between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m.

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

P.BHAVADASAN,

¶38

Judge.

¶39

okb.

P.P.Pratheeshan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.P.Pratheeshan 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

T.R.Mohmmed Vs the State of Kerala

Koyotty Vs State of Kerala

Venu K. Nair Vs State of Kerala

Jamnas Vs State of Kerala

Abhilash Vs State of Kerala

Babu V.G. Vs State of Kerala