Allowed

Shibu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Mar 2014Bail Appl./1929/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On anticipatory bail application in IPC offences involving assault, outrage of modesty, and cheating. Court granted bail subject to conditions including surrender, interrogation, passport surrender, no inducement, and obtaining prior permission for leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender, bond execution with sureties, interrogation availability, passport surrender, and conditions regarding witness tampering and leaving India.

Shibu Vs State of Kerala — Caste Atrocities | 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 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/3RD CHAITHRA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1929 of 2014 (A)

¶6

CRIME NO. 267/2014 OF POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION , KOLLAM

¶7

ACCUSED(S)/PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. SHIBU AGED 32 YEARS

¶9

RAJI VILASOM, THANIMOODU, KARINGANNOOR P.O.

¶10

VALINALLOOR, KOTTARAKARA TALUK.

¶11

2. PATHU @ SHAJI AGED 22 YEARS

¶12

W/O. SHIBU, RAJI VILASOM, THANIMOODU

¶13

KARINGANNOOR P.O., VALINALLOOR, KOTTARAKARA TALUK.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE

¶15

COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTION HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶17

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶18

POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691517.

¶19

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JJJ

¶22

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶23

B.A. No. 1929 of 2014 (A)

¶24

Dated this the 24^th day of March, 2014

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.267/2014 of Pooyappally Police Station, Kollam District. Offences alleged are under sections 323, 324, 354, 447 r/w 34 of IPC. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶27

It is alleged that on 28.02.2014 at 3.00 pm the

¶28

accused, in furtherance of the common intention, attacked the defacto complainant after encroaching into the courtyard of the complainant. The 1^st accused kicked on her abdomen and also outraged her modesty, it is alleged.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties are neighbours and that the dispute arose when the children in the Anganavadi had some quarrel.

¶30

B.A. No.1929/2014

¶31

-2-

¶32

Considering all the aspects the following directions

¶33

are issued:

¶34

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:

¶35

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 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.

¶36

B.A. No.1929/2014

¶37

-3-

¶38

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

¶39

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.

¶40

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

¶41

B.A. No.1929/2014

¶42

-4-

¶43

with the evidence.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶48

//True Copy//

¶49

P.A. to Judge

¶50

jjj

Shibu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shibu 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

Shineesh Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Leela Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rahiman Vs State of Kerala

A.Pramod Vs State of Kerala