Allowed

Pramod K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Feb 2016Bail Appl./1003/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court granted bail to petitioners accused of offences under IPC sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 308 and Kerala Panchayath Raj Act 128(1)(b), arising from a dispute during Local Self Government elections. The court held that custodial interrogation was not essential as no specific direct overt act was attributed to them.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to appearance before Investigating Officer within ten days, furnishing bond of Rs. 40,000 with two sureties, and refraining from threatening the complainant or witnesses.

Pramod K Vs State of Kerala — Election Law | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/26TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1003 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 953/2015 OF PERINGOME POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1,2,5 AND 6:

¶8

1. PRAMOD K, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O KUNHIRAMAN, KUDACHI HOUSE,

¶9

PERINTHATTA AMSOM & DESOM.

¶10

2. NITHIN.P, S/O.BHASKARAN,AGED 24 YEARS,

¶11

PUTHUVAKKAL HOUSE, PERINTHATTA AMSOM.

¶12

3. VINOD.K.E, S/O.JANARDHANAN,

¶13

AGED 38 YEARS, KAKKATT EDADATH HOUSE,

¶14

PERINTHATTA AMSOM.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD

¶16

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶17

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

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.BINDU GOPINATH

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

mbr/

¶21

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶22

B.A.No.1003 of 2016

¶23

Dated this the 15^th day of February, 2016

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioners are the accused nos.2, 4 and 7 in Crime No. of 953/2015 of Peringome Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 308 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 128(1) (B) of Kerala Panchayath Raj Act. The 1^st petitioner has been arrayed in the petition as the 3^rd accused, though the learned Public Prosecutor on instructions clarified that the 1^st petitioner is now arrayed as the 2^nd accused.

¶26

As a sequel to a dispute that arose on the

¶27

day of the election to the Local Self Government institutions, on 02.11.2015 at 3.00p.m., it is alleged that the petitioners along with the remaining accused formed into an unlawful assembly, armed with iron rod and attacked the de facto complainant. He sustained injuries on his nose and was taken to the hospital. The petitioners

¶28

apprehend arrest.

¶29

B.A.No.1003 of 2016

¶30

¶31

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that

¶32

the accused nos. 1,3,5 and 6 were arrested and released on bail. The main allegation is attributed to the 5^th accused.

¶33

Having regard to the fact that the petitioners

¶34

are alleged to have formed unlawful assembly and no specific direct overt act is attributed to them, I feel that a custodial interrogation is not essential and bail can be granted subject to the following conditions:

¶35

(a) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if they are proposed to be arrested, they shall be released on bail on each executing a bond for a sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each.

¶36

(b) They shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant or his

¶37

B.A.No.1003 of 2016

¶38

¶39

witnesses.

¶40

(c ) They shall appear before the Investigating

¶41

Officer as and when called for and co-operate

¶42

with the investigation.

¶43

The bail application is allowed.

¶44

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶45

¶46

//TRUE COPY//

¶47

P.A. TO JUDGE

Pramod K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod K 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

Hariprasad Vs State of Kerala

Ummar K.P Vs State of Kerala

Zacharia Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Chandu Vs State of Kerala

Kusalaksha Vs Station House Officer

Suresh @ Kopra Suresh Vs State of Kerala