Allowed

M.V. Prasanthan, S/O.Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Dec 2013Bail Appl./8250/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail application filed by accused persons involved in an assault case. The court granted bail conditioning surrender for interrogation, bond execution, and compliance with further police inquiries if required.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on execution of bond with sureties subject to conditions including reporting to the Investigating Officer and cooperation with the investigation.

M.V. Prasanthan, S/O.Krishnan 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 THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 8250 of 2013 () ------------------------------CRIME NO. 1270/2013 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION , KANNUR ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------1. M.V. PRASANTHAN, S/O.KRISHNAN AGED 38 YEARS VYTHALA, KURUMATHUR AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶5

2. T. PAVITHRAN, S/O.KUMARAN AGED 42 YEARS CHIRAKKOTH HOUSE, VYTHALA KURUMATHUR AMSOM TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT

¶6

3. PRASAD I.P, S/O. RAGHAVAN AGED 30 YEARS VYTHALA, KURUMATHUR AMSOM TALIPARAMBA TALUK KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADVS.SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI SRI.J.ABHILASH

¶8

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT: --------------------------

¶9

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, THROUGH S.H.O TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION KANNUR DT.

¶10

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV SREEJITH

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

¶13

=========================

¶14

B.A.No.8250 of 2013

¶15

============================ Dated this the 11^th day of December, 2013

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3, in Crime No.1270 of 2013 of the Taliparamba Police Station for the offences punishable under Secs.341, 323 and 308 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.

¶18

Case is that on 03.11.2013 at about 10 p.m, the petitioners attacked the de facto complainant and others with iron pipe. The first petitioner is said to have used iron pipe. Petitioners 2 and 3 wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him with hands.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the iron pipe is recovered. It is also submitted that the first petitioner is reported to be involved in two other crimes.

¶20

Learned counsel submits that the de facto complainant and others attacked the first petitioner for which the Taliparamba police have registered Crime No.1269 of 2013 for various offences including Sec.308 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also submitted that the parties have settled the dispute. The further submission is that this Court has granted relief to the accused in Crime No.1269 of

¶21

B.A.No.8250 of 2013

¶22

¶23

2013 as per order dated 06.12.2013 in B.A.No.7807 of 2013.

¶24

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am inclined to grant relief since custodial interrogation of the petitioners is found not required.

¶25

Resultantly this application is allowed as under:

¶26

(i) Petitioners shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.1270 of 2013 of the Taliparamba Police Station on 18.12.2013 at 10 a.m for interrogation.

¶27

(ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioners on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioners shall comply.

¶28

(iii) In case arrest of the petitioners is recorded, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.

¶29

(iv) On such production, learned magistrate shall release the petitioners (if not required to be detained otherwise) on bail on their executing bond for `25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:

¶30

(a) Petitioners shall report to the officer investigating Crime No.1270 of 2013 of the Taliparamba

¶31

B.A.No.8250 of 2013

¶32

¶33

Police Station on alternate Saturdays between 10a.m and 12p.m for a period of two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶34

(b) Petitioners shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for interrogation.

¶35

¶36

(d) Petitioners shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.

¶37

(e) Petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.

¶38

(f) In case the petitioners violate any of the above conditions, it is open to the investigating officer to move the learned magistrate (until committal if any, and thereafter before the learned Sessions Judge, concerned) for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K Shaji Vs. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).

¶39

Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶40

Sbna

¶41

True Copy P A to Judge

M.V. Prasanthan, S/O.Krishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.V. Prasanthan, S/O.Krishnan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kripal Vs the State of Kerala

Lonakutty Vs State of Kerala

Irishi Vs State of Kerala

K.Vijayan Vs State of Kerala

Sreenivasan Vs State of Kerala

Aboobacker M.K Vs Inspector of Police