Partly allowed

Vinod v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jan 2016Bail Appl./8371/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order addresses a bail application by accused Nos.1 to 4 in a criminal case involving assault and attempted murder. The court dismissed the plea of the first accused but granted conditional bail to the remaining three applicants.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for accused Nos.2 to 4 upon executing a bond with two sureties each for Rs. 40,000/-, appearing for interrogation and weekly reporting, and not interfering with the investigation.

Vinod 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

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/24TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 8371 of 2015 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 1496/2015 OF PONKUNNAM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 4:

¶8

1. VINOD, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.P.K. BHASKARAN, PARIYARATHU HOUSE, PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM.

¶9

2. MOHANAN, AGED 49 YEARS,

¶10

S/O. CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, VECHOOKUNNEL HOUSE, THEKKETH KAVALA. P.O, PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM.

¶11

3. GIREESH, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, PULLUPADATH HOUSE, CHIRAKADAVU CENTRE. P.O, PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM.

¶12

4. RATHEESH, AGED 33 YEARS,

¶13

S/O. SIVANKUTTY, MALAYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAVUMBHAGOM. P.O., CHERUVALLY, PONKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW.

¶15

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶16

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

¶17

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y. LALIZA.

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

rs.

¶20

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶21

B. A. No. 8371 of 2015

¶22

Dated this the 14^th day of January, 2016

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 to 4 in crime No.1496/2015 of Ponkunnam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 342, 323, 307 & 34 IPC.

¶25

The allegation of the prosecution is that, on 15.12.2015 at about 8.50 p.m., the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant after wrongfully restraining him. It is alleged that the 1^st accused by using a stick hit on his leg. He was taken to the hospital and crime was registered. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail.

¶26

The wound certificate indicates that the defacto complainant had sustained several abrasions and injuries on his body including an incise wound on the dorsal aspect. It is submitted that the 1^st accused is involved in yet another case.

¶27

Having regard to the entire facts, I feel that the 1^st accused is not entitled for the benefit of pre-arrest bail. Though specific overt act is alleged against the remaining accused, but they have not used any weapon. Hence I am inclined to allow the bail application in part. The pre-arrest bail application of the 1^st accused is dismissed and the bail application of petitioners 2 to 4 (accused Nos.2 to 4) are allowed as follows:

¶28

B. A. No. 8371 of 2015

¶29

¶30

(i) The petitioners 2 to 4 shall appear before the Investigation Officer within 10 days from to day and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter if they are proposed to be arrested, they shall be released on bail, on each of the petitioner executing a bond for a sum of 40,000/-₹ (Rupee forty thousand only) with two sureties each for the like sum.

¶31

(ii) They shall appear before the Investigation Officer an all Wednesdays between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. for a period of one month from the date of execution of the bond.

¶32

(iii) They shall not threaten the defacto complainant, coerce or intimidate the witnesses and shall not in any manner interfere with the investigation.

¶33

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶34

/true copy/

¶35

P. A. to Judge

¶36

Vinod v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santhosh Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Irshath Beevi Vs State of Kerala

Somy Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Sathar Vs State of Kerala

Aju A.S. Vs State of Kerala

Suneesh Kumar K.P. Vs State of Kerala