Allowed

Shan v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1742/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused persons in a case involving alleged molestation and trespass. The Court directed the petitioners to surrender for interrogation and imposed several conditions, including bail bond, execution of affidavit, and intimacy with authorities.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions including surrender, bail bond execution, and compliance with various restrictions.

Shan Vs the 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

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/26TH PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1742 of 2014 (C)

¶6

CRIME NO. 215/2014 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶7

ACCUSED(S)/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 &2:

¶8

1. SHAN AGED 30 YEARS S/O.SUSEELAN, ANDHIYOOR KUZHIVILA HOUSE, BALARAMAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501.

¶9

2. SUSEELAN, AGED 55 YEARS S/O.SATHYANESAN, ANDHIYOOR KUZHIVILA HOUSE BALARAMAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU

¶11

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

JJJ

¶16

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶17

B.A. No. 1742 of 2014

¶18

Dated this the 17^th day of March, 2014

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.215/2014 of Balaramapuram Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. Offences alleged are under sections 452, 294(b), 323, 324 and 354 r/w 34 of IPC. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶21

It is alleged that the accused persons trespassed into the house of the complainant at 10.30 pm and outraged the modesty of the defacto complainant by pulling the blouse worn by her.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are 24 crimes registered against the son of the defacto complainant, out of which 3 crimes were registered based on the complaint filed by the petitioners herein. It is

¶23

further submitted that this complaint has been filed only as

¶24

B.A. No. 1742/2014

¶25

-2-

¶26

a counter blast to the complaint filed by the petitioners.

¶27

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶28

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:

¶29

a. The petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 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

¶30

B.A. No. 1742/2014

¶31

-3-

¶32

of the sureties.

¶33

b. The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer.

¶34

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.

¶35

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 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.

¶36

B.A. No. 1742/2014

¶37

-4-

¶38

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

¶39

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

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶42

//True Copy//

¶43

P.A. to Judge

¶44

jjj

Shan v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shan 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

Noufal Mon Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Binod Vs State of Kerala

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