Allowed

Krishnankutty v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Mar 2016Bail Appl./1710/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail Application filed by Krishnankutty accused of offences under Sections 294(b), 452 and 308 of IPC. Court granted bail on conditions including execution of bond, appearance before IO, and non-intervention in investigation.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on conditions: execution of bond with sureties, appearance before IO, no trespass or annoyance of complainant, no interference in investigation.

Krishnankutty Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/18TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1710 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 177/2016 OF KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

KRISHNANKUTTY, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.MANIYAN, KURIYIDATHUKONAM, CARUVILA VEEDU, CHEMMARATHUMMUKKU, CHENGIKUNNU DESOM, NAGAROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.K.SIJU

¶10

SRI.S.ABHILASH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE :

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULA.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R.REMA

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶17

B. A. No. 1710 of 2016

¶18

Dated this the 8^th day of March, 2016

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 177/2016 of Kilimanoor Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 452 and 308 of IPC.

¶21

The allegation is that, the petitioner herein used to cause annoyance to the defacto complainant, who was living with the children, since her husband was working abroad. As a retaliation for that, on 05.02.2016 at 4.30 p.m., the accused allegedly trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and kept open the gas cylinder. Complaint was laid and the petitioner was arrested on 06.02.2016.

¶22

In the FIS itself, the petitioner has stated that the accused used to come drunk, stand in front of her house and abuse her. It appears that, the present incident was a sequel to a complaint laid earlier. The investigation has substantially progressed.

¶23

Having regard to the nature of allegations, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, on the following conditions:

¶24

B. A. No. 1710 of 2016

¶25

¶26

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶27

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Saturdays between 10.00 am and 11.00 am for a period of three months from the date of his release.

¶28

(iii) He shall not trespass into the house of the defacto complainant, cause annoyance or disturb the peaceful living of the defacto complainant and her family and shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant and the witnesses

¶29

nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation

¶30

Sd/SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶31

/true copy/

¶32

P. A. to Judge

¶33

Krishnankutty v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnankutty 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

Arun B Vs State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Baiju Vs State of Kerala

Amal Sasidharan Vs State of Kerala

S.R.Sudheesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala