Allowed

P.v.Gopalakrisna Menon v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jan 2013Bail Appl./9953/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application concerning allegations of violent confrontation at a temple over management rights, the High Court exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction. The court ordered the petitioners to surrender within three days, execute a bond with sureties, and report to the investigating officer. Bail was granted subject to strict conditions prohibiting interference with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted, surrender before 22.01.2013, execution of bond with two solvent sureties for Rs. 10,000 each, and ongoing reporting.

P.v.Gopalakrisna Menon Vs the 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

SUNDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/25TH POUSHA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 9953 of 2012 ()

¶6

-----------------------------CRIME NO. 625/2012 OF FEROKE POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT)

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1,4,6,8,9,10,11,12 & 12 .:

¶8

------------------------------------------------------------ -----

¶9

1. P.V.GOPALAKRISNA MENON AGED 50 YEARS

¶10

S/O. C.P.MENON,SREESAILAM,CHELEMBRA

¶11

RAMANATTUKARA,KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

2. SUNIL KUMAR, S/O.VELAYUDHAN AGED 47 YEARS

¶13

KOTTAYIL HOUSE,KARAPARAMBU,KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶14

3. JAYAPRAKASH AMBADI, AGED 56 YEARS S/O.KUNHIRAMAN,KRISHNA GIRI

¶15

KADALUNDI P.O. KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶16

4. K. VISWANATHAN, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, AGED 50 YEARS KUNDIL HOUSE,KADALUNDI,KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶17

5. ANIL KUMAR, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 44 YEARS

¶18

KARAPARAMBIL HOUSE,KADALUNDI,KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶19

6. MURUKESAN P.V. AGED 34 YEARS

¶20

CHENAPURATH HOUSE,SREESAILAM,CHELEMBRA PULLIPARAMBA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶21

7. SUSANTH O.P., S/O.GANGADHARAN, AGED 34 YEARS AMBALI PARAMBIL HOUSE,SUJA NIVAS KADALUNDI, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶22

8. AMBADI JAYAKRISHNAN, AGED 42 YEARS S/O. KUNHIRAMAN,KRISHNA GIRI

¶23

KADALUNDI, KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶24

BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶25

Bail Appl..No. 9953 of 2012 ()

¶26

REPONDENT/STATE:

¶27

-------------------------------

¶28

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM KOCHI-31 - THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE FEROKE POLICE STATION KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶29

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SHEEBA M.T.

¶30

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

¶32

P. BHAVADASAN, J.

¶33

- - - - B.A. No. 9953 of 2012

¶34

- - - - Dated this the 15^th day of January, 2013.

¶35

ORDER

¶36

The petitioners are accused Nos. 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Crime No.625 of 2012 of Feroke Police Station, who is alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 and 341 read with Section 34 I.P.C.

¶37

The incident which gave rise to the case occurred on 14.12.2012 in a temple at Kadalundi.

¶38

It is learned that in respect of certain matters relating to the temple, there is a suit pending consideration before the courts. It would appear from the records that there was some conflict regarding the interest in the temple and that was being challenged by the rival groups. The incident which gave rise to the crime occurred on 14.12.2012. The allegation against the petitioners is that when one of the members of the rival group tried to light

¶39

B.A.9953/2012.

¶40

¶41

the lamps in the temple, that was prevented and he was attacked.

¶42

The petitioners would say that they had arranged a prayer with lighted lamps and that was interfered by the members of the rival group. That resulted in the people gathering at the spot and a commotion occurred, in which the defacto complainant was injured. The petitioners would say that they have not committed any act which would constitute an offence. All the members of the Managing Trust have been shown as accused.

¶43

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and after perusing the records, it is felt that there is some substance in the complaint voiced by the petitioners. Suffice is to say, it appears that this is a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioners.

¶44

Therefore, this application is allowed on the following conditions:

¶45

B.A.9953/2012.

¶46

¶47

i) Petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 22.01.2013, who, after interrogation shall produce them before the JFCM court concerned, which court, on applications for bail being moved by the petitioners, shall release them on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the said court.

¶48

ii) The learned Magistrate may ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties for the purpose of executing the bond.

¶49

iii) Petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him.

¶50

B.A.9953/2012.

¶51

¶52

iv) Petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses.

¶53

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

¶54

P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE

¶55

sb.

P.v.Gopalakrisna Menon v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.v.Gopalakrisna Menon v. the 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

Jayesh Gopinath Vs State of Kerala

A.v.Jayan Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Vs State of Kerala

T.R.Mohmmed Vs the State of Kerala

Koyotty Vs State of Kerala

Venu K. Nair Vs State of Kerala