Allowed

Praveen v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Mar 2018Bail Appl./1008/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an application for anticipatory bail for three accused charged with assault on weapons. The court held that custodial interrogation was not necessitous, granting bail subject to specific conditions including weekly appearances and cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Conditional anticipatory bail granted; petitioners to appear within ten days and execute a bond for Rs.40,000/- with two sureties.

Praveen Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1008 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 18/2018 OF KONGAD POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS 1 TO 3

¶8

1 PRAVEEN

¶9

AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. VISWANATHAN, PATTATHODI HOUSE, MANIKKASSERY POST, KONGAD, PALAKKAD TALUK & DISTRICT.

¶10

2 VIPIN

¶11

AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. VISWANATHAN, PATTATHODI HOUSE, MANIKKASSERY POST,

¶12

KONGAD, PALAKKAD TALUK & DISTRICT.

¶13

3 JINJU

¶14

AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. LAKSHMANAN, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE, MANIKKASSERY POST,

¶15

KONGAD, PALAKKAD TALUK & DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADVS.SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL

¶17

SMT.R.RAJITHA SMT.S.R.NEETHU RAJ SMT.RASHIDA CHEMMENAMPALLY

¶18

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:

¶19

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031

¶20

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAJJU.S

¶21

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J

¶24

B.A No.1008 of 2018

¶25

Dated this the 22^nd day of March, 2018

¶26

ORDER

¶27

1.This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶28

2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No.18 of 2018 of Kongad Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506(ii) and 308 r/w Sec. 34 of the IPC and Sec.27 of the Arms Act.

¶29

3.It is alleged that, on 03.01.2018 at about 7.50 p.m., the petitioners herein wrongfully restrained the informant and attacked him with weapons causing injuries.

¶30

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are without basis. It is urged that only superficial injuries were sustained by the victim and the petitioners have been roped in without any reason.

¶31

5.The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer and he has made available the case diary for perusal.

¶32

6.I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the discharge certificate, which is dated 06.03.2018

¶33

B.A No.1008 of 2018 2

¶34

issued by the Medical Consultant of the District Hospital, Palakkad. Only minor abrasions are noted in the certificate.

¶35

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the injuries inflicted and the character and antecedents of the petitioners, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessitous for an effective investigation.

¶36

8.In the result, this application will stand allowed. The petitioners shall appear before the investigation officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if they are proposed to be arrested, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the folowing conditions:

¶37

i)The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶38

ii)The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such

¶39

B.A No.1008 of 2018

¶40

¶41

facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶42

iii)The petitioners shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶43

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶44

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,

JUDGE

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

Praveen v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen 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

Praful G.N Vs State of Kerala

Pradeep Kora Vs State of Kerala

Shahil Vs State of Kerala

T.a.Koshore Vs State of Kerala

T.a.Kishore Vs State of Kerala

Uma V.S Vs State of Kerala