Allowed

Jobin.P.v v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC22 Mar 2017Bail Appl./1431/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the second accused in a case involving offences under IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The court allowed bail observing non-atrocity offences were bailable, while the prosecution had no case against the petitioner for atrocities charges.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail executing a bond for Rs.25,000 with two sureties for like sums, subject to standard conditions.

Jobin.P.v Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2017/1ST CHAITHRA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1431 of 2017 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 288/2017 OF ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

JOBIN. P.V., AGED:23 YEARS, S/O CHELLAMMA T.K., RESIDING PEZHUMMOOTTIL HOUSE, PARIYARAM P.O, ELANTHOOR VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN.

¶10

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARANMULA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

rs.

¶15

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶16

B.A.No.1431 of 2017

¶17

Dated this the 22^nd day of March, 2017

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.288 of 2017 of

¶21

Aranmula Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(i) r/w Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3(1) (s) and 3(1)(v) (a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶22

The prosecution case is that the petitioner along with the co-accused threatened the victim, who belongs to a scheduled caste and assaulted him with hands and uttered obscene words. The prosecution has also a case that the first accused called the victim his caste name.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

The only offences which are non-bailable are those which fall under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution has no case that the petitioner committed any of these offences. The other offences are bailable. So I am inclined to grant the prayer of the petitioner.

¶25

B.A.No.1431 of 2017

¶26

¶27

In the result, this application is allowed.

¶28

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail after interrogation on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum if he is arrested by the Investigating Officer in connection with this case.

¶29

ii. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer if he is so required.

¶30

iii. He shall surrender his passport before the lower court concerned or if he does not have one he shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of his release.

¶31

iv. He shall not get himself involved in any other criminal case while he is on bail.

¶32

v. He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses.

¶33

vi. He shall not destroy or tamper with evidence.

¶34

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶35

learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE

¶38

/True copy/

¶39

¶40

P.A. to Judge

Jobin.P.v v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jobin.P.v v. the Sub Inspector of Police

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

Ummer Sakafi Vs State of Kerala

Ummer Sakafi Vs State of Kerala

Jamaluddeen Vs State of Kerala

Rajith Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Vs the State of Kerala

Kali Vs State of Kerala