Allowed

Vinod @ Kallappan v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Sept 2014Bail Appl./6584/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application under s. 439 Cr.P.C. for the third accused in a murder case. The court held that further detention was not warranted as the investigation was nearly complete and the cause of death appeared to be cardiac arrest.

What did the court decide?

petition allowed; direction to release petitioner on bail on bond for Rs. 35,000 with two solvent sureties subject to conditions.

Vinod @ Kallappan Vs the State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2014/26TH BHADRA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6584 of 2014 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 7617/2014 of J.M.F.C.-1,VARKALA DATED 16-08-2014

¶7

CRIME NO. 857/2014 OF KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANDAPURAM

¶8

PETITIONER(S)/3RD ACCUSED:

¶9

VINOD @ KALLAPPAN AGED 23 YEARS S/O.RAVEENDRAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, PALLIKKADU NILAKKAMUKKU, KADAKKAVOOR, CHIRAYINKEEZHU VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COPMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

2.THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KADAKKAVOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT-695041.

¶14

3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAKKAVOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT-695041.

¶15

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.C.RASHEED

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-09-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

ami/

¶18

V.K.MOHANAN, J.

¶19

B.A.No.6584 of 2014

¶20

Dated this the 17^th day of September, 2014.

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This is an application seeking regular bail filed under section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the 3^rd respondent in Crime No.857 of 2014 of Kadakkavoor Police Station as he is in custody from 5.8.2014 onwards.

¶23

The prosecution allegation against the accused in

¶24

the above crime is that they trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant at about 8 p.m. on 3.8.2014 in furtherance of their common intention to cause hurt to the children of the de facto complainant and when the father of the de facto complainant interfered to save the children, the accused beat on the head of the victim with wooden stick and manhandled him, consequent to which, the victim died on the spot. So, according to the prosecution, the accused, including the petitioner herein, had committed

¶25

B.A.No.6584 of 2014

¶26

¶27

the offences punishable under sections 449, 323, 324, 302 r/w 34 of IPC.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner surrendered before the Investigating Officer on 5.8.2014 and thereafter he is in custody and the further detention of the petitioner is not required. According to the learned counsel, the death was not as a result of any injury inflicted on the deceased but due to cardiac arrest. It is also the contention of the learned counsel that the incident had occurred when the children of the de facto complainant attacked the accused. Thus it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the investigation is practically over, the further detention of the petitioner is not warranted. The learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted that the reason for the death is due to occlusive coronary artery disease and

¶30

B.A.No.6584 of 2014

¶31

¶32

the investigation is almost over.

¶33

Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the case, particularly in view of the factom of cause of death, and considering the fact that the investigation is practically over, according to me, the further detention of the petitioner is not warranted. So, by imposing stringent conditions, this petition can be allowed.

¶34

In the result, this petition is allowed, granting bail. Accordingly, there will be a direction to release the petitioner on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs.35,000/with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate of the court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Varkala, and on the following other conditions.

¶35

The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer in the above crime, between 10 and 11 a.m. on Sundays once in a fortnight.

¶36

The petitioner is directed to surrender his Passport before the Investigating Officer at the time of execution of bond and if he is not having the Passport, file an affidavit to that effect in the

¶37

B.A.No.6584 of 2014

¶38

¶39

said court. The petitioner is free to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for the release of the Passport as and when required and in case of an application is filed in this regard, the learned Magistrate is directed to consider the same on merit and pass appropriate orders, guided by the decision rendered by this Court in Ashok Kumar Vs. State of Kerala (2009(2) KLT 712) .

¶40

The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and he shall not interfere with the same or attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper the evidence.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

V.K.MOHANAN, Judge.

¶43

ami/

¶44

//True copy//

¶45

P.A.to Judge

Vinod @ Kallappan v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod @ Kallappan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anoop Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Zakariya P. @ Jakki Vs State of Kerala

Sijo Mathai Vs State of Kerala

C.K. Abdul Rahiman Sha Vs State of Kerala

Vipin Kumar Vs the S.I of Police

Vinu Vs State of Kerala