Allowed

Vijayakumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1600/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to four accused persons charged with offences under various sections of IPC and Section 31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The court directed surrender within seven days and specified multiple conditions for bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to execution of bond, surrender within seven days, appearance for interrogation on Mondays, production of passports, and other conduct-related conditions.

Vijayakumar Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/16TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 1600 of 2014 ()

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 312/2014 of I ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 20-02-2014

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN MC 4/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURTII, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 16-01-2014 CRIME NO. 38/2014 OF POONTHURA POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

ACCUSED(S)/APPLICANTS:

¶8

1. VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.BHARGAVAN NAIR ASWATHY, T.C.43/412, THOPPIL GARDEN

¶9

KAMALESWARAM MANACAUD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2. SHEEJA P., AGED 43 YEARS W/O.VIJAYAKUMAR ASWATHY, T.C.43/412, THOPPIL GARDEN

¶11

KAMALESWARAM MANACAUD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

3. HIRANMAYI, AGED 37 YEARS W/O.MOHANAN LAKSHMI NIVAS, AZHAKULAM, VIZHINJAM

¶13

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶14

4. MOHANAN D. S/O.DAMODHARAN, LAKSHMI NIVAS, AZHAKULAM VIZHINJAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

BY ADVS.SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED

¶16

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶17

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. (SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE POONTHURA POLICE STATION)

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JJJ

¶21

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶22

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

¶23

B.A. No. 1600 of 2014

¶24

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

¶25

Dated this the 7^th day of March, 2014

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 4 in Crime No.38/2014 of Poonthura police station, Thiruvananthapuram district. The offences alleged against them are under Secs.143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(ii) IPC and Sec.31 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Apprehending arrest, the petition is filed.

¶28

The complainant is the mother of the second petitioner (Sheeja). According to the complainant the house belonged to her. The second petitioner says that the house belongs to her. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to certain documents in support of that contention. It is submitted by the learned counsel that as against the order

¶29

-: 2 :-

¶30

B.A. No. 1600/2014

¶31

passed by the learned Magistrate an appeal has been filed and it is pending before the learned Sessions Judge. It is further submitted that the interim order was passed earlier without hearing the petitioners and so the contention that the petitioners have violated the protection order and thus they have committed the offence punishable under Sec.31 of PWDV Act also cannot be sustained. I am not entering into the merits of the case.

¶32

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶33

The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven 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:

¶34

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

¶35

-: 3 :-

¶36

B.A. No. 1600/2014

¶37

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 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.

¶38

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

¶39

c. The accused shall produce 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.

¶40

d. The accused will also file 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 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.

¶41

e. The accused shall not leave the State of Kerala without permission of the court.

¶42

-: 4 :-

¶43

B.A. No. 1600/2014

¶44

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

¶45

sd/-

¶46

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶47

das

¶48

// True copy //

¶49

PA to Judge

Vijayakumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayakumar 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

Pramod Vs State of Kerala

Joseph Thomas @ Rarichan Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Saleem Vs the State of Kerala

Balamurugan Vs State of Kerala

Moosa Haji Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala