Remanded

Suresh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1339/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, considering an anticipatory bail application filed by an accused facing charges of trespassing and outraging modesty, directed the petitioner to surrender before the Magistrate within 10 days, with bail to be granted subject to specific conditions regarding bond, sureties, and identity verification.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender before Magistrate within 10 days; bail granted contingent on bond, sureties, and identity verification.

Suresh Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/19TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1339 of 2014 ()

¶6

------------------------------CRIME NO. 83/2014 OF PEERUMEDU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED :-

¶8

SURESH, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. MANI, MELAZHUTHA POBS ESTATE LANE MELAZHUTHA BHAGAM, PEERMADE VILLAGE.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE-COMPLAINANT(S) :-

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶12

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEERMADE POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 531.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

jvt

¶16

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶17

B.A. No.1339 of 2014

¶18

Dated this the 10^th day of March 2014

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.83/2014 of Peermade Police Station. The offences alleged against him are punishable under Secs.447 and 354 of IPC. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶21

It is alleged that on 6.2.2014 at 10 PM, the petitioner trespassed into the house compound of the complainant and outraged modesty of the de facto complainant.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Crime No.81/2014 was registered against Sajeev, the son of the de facto complainant alleging offences punishable under Sec.307 and other sections of IPC. It is stated that petitioner had sustained serious injuries and was admitted in the Medical College Hospital. He underwent treatment as an inpatient for 8 days.

¶23

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶24

The petitioner shall surrender before the learned

¶25

B.A. No.1339 of 2014

¶26

-: 2 :-

¶27

Magistrate within 10 days from today. The learned Magistrate

¶28

will grant bail to the petitioner but on the following conditions:

¶29

a. The accused shall execute a bond for ₹10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties.

¶30

b. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN,

J UDGE.

//True Copy//

P.A. To Judge

Jvt

Suresh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balamurugan Vs State of Kerala

Moosa Haji Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Hamsa Musaliyar Vs State of Kerala

Suhara Vs State of Kerala

Shamnad Vs State of Kerala