Allowed

Nisanth v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1744/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of dowry-related offences, directing surrender and imposing specific conditions including execution of bond, availability for interrogation, and restriction on leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions of surrender, bond execution, interrogation availability, and passport surrender.

Nisanth Vs State of Kerala — Dowry and Cruelty | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/22ND PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1744 of 2014 () ------------------------------CRIME NO. 484/2014 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ------

¶6

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶7

------------------

¶8

NISANTH, AGED 26 YEARS,S/O.LATE BABU, EDAPARAMBIL, VISHNU BHAVAN KOTTUKULANGARA, KAYAMKULAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S SRI.RENJIT GEORGE SMT.ANJU MOHAN SRI.R.ARUN (KAYAMKULAM) SRI.S.K.SUJITH KRISHNA SRI.S.VISHNU (ARIKKATTIL) SRI.S.SHAJAHAN (ADOOR)

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶11

------------------

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031

¶13

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KAYAMKULAM, KOLLAM - 691006

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAJESH VIJAYAN

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶18

B.A. No. 1744 of 2014

¶19

Dated this the 13^th day of March, 2014

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.484/2014 of Kayamkulam Police Station, Alappuzha District. Offences alleged are under sections 498A and 506(i) of IPC. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶22

The petitioner is the husband of the complainant. Marriage between the petitioner and the complainant was solemnized on 22.06.2013. It is alleged that the complainant was subjected to physical and mental cruelty and demanded more amount as dowry.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are not true.

¶24

Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued:

¶25

B.A. No. 1744/2014

¶26

-2-

¶27

The petitioner 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 petitioner but on the following conditions:

¶28

a. The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty 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.

¶29

b. The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and shall appear

¶30

B.A. No. 1744/2014

¶31

-3-

¶32

before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

¶33

c. The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate.

¶34

d. The petitioner will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he 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.

¶35

e. The petitioner shall not leave India without the prior permission of the

¶36

B.A. No. 1744/2014

¶37

-4-

¶38

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.

Sd/-

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN,

JUDGE

//True Copy//

P.A. to Judge

jjj

Nisanth v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nisanth 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

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Binukumar Vs State of Kerala

Lalkumar Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Jayan Vs the State of Kerala

Suraj Soman Vs State of Kerala