Allowed

Anuraj Manoharan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Jan 2018Bail Appl./149/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam allowed bail to two accused persons in a criminal case alleging assault and criminal trespass under various IPC sections, subject to specific conditions regarding bonds, appearance before the investigating officer, and restriction on influencing witnesses or leaving the country.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; petitioners released on bail subject to execution of bond for Rs.50,000 each with sureties, appearing before IO on Saturdays, not influencing witnesses, not committing offences, and

Anuraj Manoharan 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

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 25TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 149 of 2018

¶6

(CRIME NO.416/2017 OF KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION, KANNUR)

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3:

¶8

1 ANURAJ MANOHARAN,

¶9

AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. MANOHARAN,

¶10

MURIKUMTHANATH HOUSE, ERUVESSI AMSOM,

¶11

POOPARAMBA, THALIPPARAMBU TALUK,

¶12

KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670632.

¶13

2 JOBIN JOSEPH, AGED 27 YEARS,

¶14

S/O.JOSEPH, KOTTARATHIL HOUSE,

¶15

ERUVESSI AMSOM,CHEMBERI, POOPARAMBA,

¶16

THALIPPARAMBU TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670632.

¶17

BY ADV.SRI.P.K.VARGHESE

¶18

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶19

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

¶20

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AJITH MURALI

¶21

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J

¶23

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

¶24

B.A. No. 149 of 2018

¶25

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

¶26

Dated this the 15^th day of January, 2018

¶27

ORDER

¶28

1.This petition is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶29

2.The petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No.416 of 2017 of the Kudiyanmala Police Station registered alleging offences punishable under 143, 144, 147, 148, 452, 341, 324, 506(ii), 427, 308 r/w. 149 of the IPC.

¶30

3.The allegation is that on 4.12.2017 at 8.30 p.m., the petitioners along with the co-indictees numbering about 15 trespassed into the Friends Arts and Sports Club and assaulted the de facto complainant with an iron rod causing bodily injuries.

¶31

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were arrested on 27.12.2017 and has been in custody. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners are innocent.

¶32

5.The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submits that the petitioners are persons with criminal antecedents.

¶33

BA.149/18

¶34

-:2:-

¶35

6.I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary. It appears that the investigation has progressed much.

¶36

7.Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the materials in support thereof, the period of detention undergone, the stage of investigation and other facts and circumstances, I am of the considered view that the petitioners can now be enlarged on bail.

¶37

8.In the result, this petition will stand allowed. However, it shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶38

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

¶39

(b) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for 2 months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶40

¶41

(d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail.

¶42

-:3:-

¶43

BA.149/18

¶44

(e) The petitioners shall not leave the country without the permission of the concerned Court.

¶45

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.

¶46

Sd/Raja Vijayaraghavan V., Judge

¶47

ps/15/1/2018

¶48

//true copy//

¶49

P.S. To Judge

Anuraj Manoharan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuraj Manoharan 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

Muhammed Kunhi Vs State of Kerala

Akash Vs State of Kerala

Satheesh Kumar Vs the State of Kerala

Prof Capt. v.C.James Vs State of Kerala

Athul @ Monkuttan Vs State of Kerala

Suriyan Vs State of Kerala