Disposed

Ponnuswami v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1397/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court entertained a bail application filed by accused persons facing allegations under IPC sections 323, 324, 498A, and 307. Declining to enter into merits, the court directed the petitioners to surrender within ten days and issued specific conditions for bail.

What did the court decide?

The petitioners were directed to surrender within ten days; bail is to be granted by the Magistrate subject to the issued conditions.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/27TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 1397 of 2014 (D)

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 408/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, MANNARKAD CRIME NO. 69/2014 OF AGALI POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶6

ACCUSED(S)/PETITIOENR/ACCUSED:

¶7

1. PONNUSWAMI, AGED 27 YEARS

¶8

S/O.KARUPPUSWAMI, NARASIMUKKU, AGALI P.O

¶9

MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD

¶10

2. KARUPPUSWAMI, AGED 60 YEARS

¶11

S/O.PATTAPPAN NADAR, NARASIMUKKU, AGALI P.O

¶12

MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD

¶13

3. KAMALATHAL AGED 46 YEARS

¶14

W/O.KARUPPUSWAMI, NARASIMUKKU, AGALI P.O

¶15

MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD

¶16

4. NAGARAJ AGED 32 YEARS

¶17

S/O.KARUPPUSWAMI, NARASIMUKKU, AGALI P.O

¶18

MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD

¶19

5. RADHA, AGED 28 YEARS

¶20

D/O.KARUPPUSWAMI, NARASIMUKKU, AGALI P.O

¶21

MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD

¶22

BY ADVS.SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

¶23

SRI.LIJU. M.P

¶24

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶25

STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE AGALI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM

¶26

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN

¶27

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

JJJ

¶29

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶30

B.A. No. 1397 of 2014

¶31

Dated this the 18^th day of March, 2014

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

Petitioners are accused in Crime No.69/2014 of Agali Police Station, Palakkad District. Offences alleged are under sections 323, 324, 498A and 307 r/w 34 of IPC. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that in the Case Diary instead of section 34 of IPC, section 149 of IPC is seen added. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶34

The allegation was that the accused persons had poured kerosene on the defacto complainant and attempted to cause her death. But the subsequent statement revealed that the allegation is not correct. Hence section 307 of IPC was deleted.

¶35

B.A. No. 1397/2014 (D)

¶36

-2-

¶37

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits

¶38

that even with regard to the allegations pertaining to other sections, there is absolutely no merit. I am not entering into the merits of the case.

¶39

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶40

The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. When applied for bail by the accused, the learned Magistrate will, considering the nature of the case, grant bail to the petitioners but on the following conditions:

¶41

a. The petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand only) each 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

¶42

B.A. No. 1397/2014 (D)

¶43

-3-

¶44

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.

¶45

b. The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶46

c. The petitioners shall surrender their original passports before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If they are not having any valid passport, they should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate.

¶47

d. The petitioners will also file an affidavit that they will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that they will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and will not directly or indirectly

¶48

B.A. No. 1397/2014 (D)

¶49

-4-

¶50

make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶51

e. The petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate.

¶52

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

¶53

Sd/N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶54

//True Copy//

¶55

P.A. to Judge

¶56

jjj

Ponnuswami v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponnuswami 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

Suma Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Nishad @ Saiman Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Manu S/O.Joseph Vs State of Kerala, Rep.by Sub Inspector of Police, Upputhara Police Station

Kannan Vs State of Kerala

Tom Jose Vs the State of Kerala

M.T.Nazar Vs State of Kerala