Allowed

Antony Raj Alias Tony v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Feb 2014Bail Appl./596/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail Application allowed for the third accused charged under IPC sections 308, 324, 341, 427, in a dispute involving assault and elopement. Court granted bail subject to surrender for interrogation, reporting, and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to surrender for interrogation, reporting every alternate Saturday, and other specified conditions.

Antony Raj Alias Tony Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/14TH MAGHA, 1935

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 596 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 1322/2013 OF WALAYAR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT

¶7

APPELLANT/ACCUSED NO.3 :

¶8

ANTONY RAJ ALIAS TONY, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.LATE STANSLAS, BUNGALAVU KALAM, WALAYAR PALAKKAD.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

¶11

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

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SREEJITH

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J

¶16

B.A.No.596 of 2014

¶17

Dated this the 3^rd day of February, 2014

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petitioner is the 3^rd accused in Crime No.1322 of 2013 of the Walayar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 427 and 308 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the applications.

¶20

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that married daughter of the first accused eloped with the defacto complainant and on account of that, the petitioner and others attacked the defacto complainant with iron rod, stone etc. Petitioner is hit the head of the defacto complainant with a stone.

¶21

Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. Defacto complainant abducted daughter of the first accused. The first accused and others attempted to prevent that. The defacto complainant attacked them. The police registered Crime No.1329 of 2013 against the defacto complainant for various offences.

¶22

On hearing both sides it appears to me that the stone (allegedly) used by the petitioner is taken to custody. Having regard to the relevant circumstances, I am inclined to

¶23

B.A.No.596 of 2014

¶24

¶25

grant relief to the petitioner.

¶26

Application is allowed as under:

¶27

(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No.1322 of 2013 of the Walayar Police Station on 10.02.2014 at 10 a.m for interrogation.

¶28

(ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply.

¶29

(iii) Petitioner shall co-operate with investigation of the

¶30

case.

¶31

(iv) In case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.

¶32

(v) On such production the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:

¶33

(a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶34

(b) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case on every alternate Saturday between 10 a.m and 12 p.m

¶35

¶36

B.A.No.596 of 2014

¶37

until filing of the final report.

¶38

¶39

(d) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.

¶40

(e) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence witnesses. (vi) In case the petitioner violates any of condition Nos. (b) to (e), bail granted hereby is liable to be cancelled for which the investigating officer may move application before the jurisdictional magistrate (until committal of the case if any, and thereafter before the learned Principal Sessions Judge concerned) as held in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala (AIR

¶41

2006 SC 100).

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶44

¶45

/True Copy/

¶46

P.A. to Judge

Antony Raj Alias Tony v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony Raj Alias Tony 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.D.Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

Muraleedharan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Salam Vs Station House Officer

Sankaran. @ Retnakaran Vs State of Kerala

Mahesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Shinad K. Vs State of Kerala