Partly allowed

Prabhakaran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1626/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala considered a bail application filed by four accused persons facing charges under Sections 341, 324, 326, 354, and 394 IPC for assault causing fracture. The court rejected anticipatory bail for one accused and granted bail with strict conditions to the others.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail rejected for second accused; bail granted to other three petitioners subject to strict conditions regarding bonds, sureties, and court appearances.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/20TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1626 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 155/2014 OF SHORNUR POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

¶7

ACCUSED(S)/PETITIONERS:

¶8

1. PRABHAKARAN, S/O.VELAPPAN AGED 48 YEARS KODAKKATTIL HOUSE, KOONATHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶9

2. JAYACHANDRAN, S/O.VELAPPAN AGED 46 YEARS KODAKKATTIL HOUSE, KOONATHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶10

3. VYSAGH K.P., S/O.PRABHAKARAN AGED 24 YEARS KODAKKATTIL HOUSE, KOONATHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶11

4. JAYESH K. AGED 22 YEARS

¶12

KODAKKATTIL HOUSE, KOONATHARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶13

BY ADVS.SRI.P.P.THAJUDEEN

¶14

SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

¶15

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶16

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

¶17

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER SHORNUR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 121.

¶18

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

das

¶21

N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶22

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

¶23

B.A. No. 1626 of 2014

¶24

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

¶25

Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2014

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.155/2014 of Shornur Police Station, Palakkad District. The offences alleged against them are under Secs.341, 324, 326, 354 and 394(b) r/w 34 of IPC.

¶28

It is alleged that on 17.02.2014 at about 5.30PM some altercation was there with regard to the ridge of a paddy field. Wife of the complainant questioned the act of the accused, she was abused using obscene words. Thereafter the defacto complainant also reached there. Then the accused persons beat the right shoulder and right leg below the knee causing fracture. The third accused also beat the complainant using iron rod.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that crime was registered against the defacto complainant

¶30

-: 2 :-

¶31

B.A. No. 1626/2014

¶32

and others as Crime No.153/2014 for the offences punishable under Secs.341 and 324 r/w 34 IPC. It is also submitted that there is civil dispute with regard to the boundary of paddy filed. It is true that there is a counter case also but the materials available on records would show that the second accused Jayachandran had reached there with an iron rod and gave a strong blow on the leg causing fracture of bone. Therefore, the request for anticipatory bail made by the second accused, Jayachandran, is rejected.

¶33

The other three 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:

¶34

a. The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the

¶35

-: 3 :-

¶36

B.A. No. 1626/2014

¶37

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 and Fridays 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

-: 4 :-

¶42

B.A. No. 1626/2014

¶43

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

¶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

Prabhakaran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakaran 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

Hamsa Musaliyar Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Suhara Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Riyas Vs State of Kerala

Basheer Vs the State of Kerala