Allowed

Sajeev v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Nov 2015Bail Appl./6138/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted anticipatory bail to a second accused in a robbery case under Section 394 IPC, subject to conditions including surrender for interrogation, bond execution, and restrictions on interfering with the investigation or intimidating witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to conditions including surrender for interrogation within two weeks, execution of bond with sureties, and adherence to conduct restrictions regarding investigation i

Sajeev Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/21ST KARTHIKA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6138 of 2015

¶6

CRIME NO. 33/2015 OF NARUVAMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

SAJEEV, S/O.VIJAYAKUMAR,AGED 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHUMATTARAKKAVIL VEEDU, IDAKODU, NEMOM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SREEJITH

¶10

RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITIONER:

¶11

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

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

mbr/

¶15

A.HARIPRASAD, J.

¶16

B.A.No.6138 of 2015

¶17

Dated this the 12^th day of November, 2015

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶20

Petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.33 of 2015 of Naruvanmoodu Police Station registered for the

¶21

offence punishable under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Prosecution case is that on 18.01.2015 at about

¶23

16.45 hours, four persons attacked the defacto complainant for not providing goonda fees. Defacto complainant was engaged in construction activities. It is the allegation that the first accused robbed `42,500/- and a mobile phone.

¶24

Heard both sides.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not implicated by the defacto complainant initially. The identity of the 4^th accused revealed was as Vellappally Jeeven. Petitioner is Sajeev

¶26

B.A.No.6138 of 2015

¶27

¶28

residing at Idakodu. His name was added much after the investigation. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is falsely implicated the case.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances and the

¶30

nature of the allegations, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with the following conditions:

¶31

(a) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of 'two weeks' from today and submit himself

¶32

for interrogation. Thereafter, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for `50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶33

(b) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of interrogation.

¶34

¶35

¶36

B.A.No.6138 of 2015

¶37

investigation of the case.

¶38

(d) The petitioner shall not intimidate or

¶39

attempt to influence the witnesses.

¶40

(e) The petitioner shall not in any manner interfere or meddle with the investigation.

¶41

(f) The petitioner shall not, during the period

¶42

of this bail get involved in any offence.

¶43

In case any of the above conditions is violated, bail

¶44

granted hereby is liable to be cancelled for which the

¶45

investigating officer may move application before the jurisdictional magistrate.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

A.HARIPRASAD, JUDGE.

¶48

¶49

/True Copy/

¶50

P.A. to Judge

Sajeev v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajeev 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

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Mubarak Vs State of Kerala

Jithu Devan Vs State of Kerala

T.P. Shivadas Fcs Vs the State of Kerala

Biju @ Gracious Antony Vs State of Kerala

Vineesh Vs State of Kerala