Allowed

Vinod Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Oct 2016Bail Appl./6665/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, the first accused in a criminal case involving assault with an iron rod, subject to standard bail conditions including surrender and reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner is directed to be released on bail upon arrest in connection with Crime No.803 of 2015 on condition of executing a bond of Rs.30,000 with two solvent sureties and complying with reporting a

Vinod Kumar 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 B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/25TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6665 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 804/2016 OF NARAKKAL POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED:

¶8

VINOD KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 45, S/O.KUMARAN, NIKATHITHARA HOUSE, EAST APPANGADU, NJARAKKAL PO, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.P.BIJIMON SRI.JACOB SAMUEL

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

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

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

“Crime No.804/2016” shown in the cause title of the final order dated 17.10.2016 in B.A.6665/2016 is corrected and substituted as “crime No.803/2016” as per order dated 23.03.2017 in Crl.M.A.11327/2016 in B.A.No.6665/2016.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶17

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶18

==========================================

¶19

B.A. No.6665 of 2016

¶20

==========================================

¶21

Dated this the 17^th day of October, 2016

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.803 of 2015 of Njarakkal Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 109, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

The prosecution allegation is that on 20.06.2016 at 7 p.m., the petitioner and the other accused in furtherance of their common intention attacked the defacto complainant with an iron rod causing fracture on his left hand.

¶25

The petitioner has filed this application under

¶26

Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶27

Heard.

¶28

It has been submitted by the learned Public

¶29

Prosecutor that a counter case had been also registered in connection with the incident in this case and in the entire

¶30

B.A. No.6665 of 2016 2

¶31

case, the defacto complainant herein is one of the accused. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other offence of similar nature. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

¶32

In the result, this application stands allowed, and the respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.803 of 2015 of Njarakkal Police Station on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Njarakkal Police Station, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within ten days from today, if not arrested in the meantime, and subject to the following further conditions:-

¶33

i. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. for three months, and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶34

ii. The petitioner shall not intimidate or

¶35

B.A. No.6665 of 2016 3

¶36

influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶37

iii. The petitioner shall not get involved in

¶38

any other offence of similar nature while on bail.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,

JUDGE

rkj

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE

“Crime No.803/2015” occurring in the 1^st and 2^nd lines of 1^st paragraph and in the 8^th and 9^th lines at page 2 of the final order dated 17-10-2016 in B.A.No.6665/2016 is corrected and substituted as “Crime No.803/2016”, as per order dated 23-03-2017 in Crl.M.A.No.11327/2016 in B.A.No.6665/2016.

¶46

Sd/Registrar (Judicial)

Vinod Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar 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

Ameen.v.P. Vs State of Kerala

Mansoor Abdullah Vs the State of Kerala

Rafi Vs State of Kerala

Chandramohanan Vs P.G.Ramachandran Nair and Another

Sreekanth Vs State of Kerala

Chenthamara Vs State of Kerala