Allowed

Nithin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jan 2017Bail Appl./22/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed the bail application filed by Nithin, the first accused in a conspiracy to assault case involving police abduction. The court granted bail considering a lack of evidence regarding the petitioner's presence during the incident and his detention since Christmas 2016.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the same amount.

Nithin Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | 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 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/28TH POUSHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 22 of 2017

¶6

CRIME NO. 491/2016 OF THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED :

¶8

NITHIN,

¶9

AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. K.MOHANAN NAIR, TC 3/536, ROHINI NIVAS, MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT :

¶12

THE STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THENHIPPALAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SAJJU.S

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶17

B.A.No.22 of 2017

¶18

Dated this the 18^th day of January, 2017

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petition filed under Section 439(1) Cr.P.C.

¶21

Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.491 of 2016 of Thenhipalam Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 120B, 353 and 363 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 20 and 25 of the Arms Act.

¶22

The prosecution case is this: the first accused engaged accused 2 to 5 to assault one Yusaff pursuant to a conspiracy entered into between the petitioner and the co-accused. On their way to there executing the plan, accused 2 to 5 were intercepted by police officers. They abducted the police officer in the car in which they came. On their way further, they were stopped by another police party which followed the car. Accused 2 to 5 were armed with deadly weapons.

¶23

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

¶24

The learned counsel submits that the prosecution has no case that the petitioner was with accused 2 to 5 when they allegedly went in the car in order to assault Yusaff, the incident alleged in this case happened without pre-planning and the petitioner cannot be held liable for

¶25

those acts. This is a matter to be ascertained at the investigation. But the

¶26

B.A.No.22 of 2017 2

¶27

fact that the petitioner was not with accused 2 to 5, inclines me to grant him bail; moreover, as he has been in custody since 23.12.2016.

¶28

In the result, this Bail Application is allowed.

¶29

i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the lower court concerned.

¶30

ii. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer every day for two weeks between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m and thereafter, every Friday between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. for four months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶31

iii. He shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses, nor shall he get himself involved in any other criminal case.

¶32

iv. 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.

¶33

v. He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court of enquiry or trial court, as the case may be.

¶34

In case of violation, the lower court concerned is empowered to

¶35

cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE

¶38

¶39

/True copy/

¶40

P.A. to Judge

Nithin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nithin 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

Praveen M.C Vs State of Kerala

Mohamed Haneefa Vs State of Kerala

Kushbu Vs the State of Kerala

Juby Jackson K.T Vs State of Kerala

Thressiamma Vs Station House Officer,Athirapilly Police Station.

M.N.Sajeevan Vs State of Kerala