Allowed

Suresh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Jan 2018Bail Appl./34/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos. 4 and 7 in a criminal case alleging offences including affray and assault. Bail was subject to conditions requiring interrogation, cooperation with investigation, non-interference with witnesses, and compliance with future arrest procedures.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for accused Nos. 4 and 7 subject to conditions of interrogation, investigation cooperation, no inducement of witnesses, and surrender compliance.

Suresh 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 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 28TH POUSHA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 34 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 2820/2017 OF NEMOM POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 4 & 7

¶8

1 SURESH,

¶9

S/O. MANIYAN, AGED 31, SARA 34- VATTAVILA VEEDU,

¶10

SARVODAYAM ROAD, KALLIYUR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

2 SAJI, S/O.GOPI, AGED 37,

¶12

SARA-160, HOUSE NO. IV/719, SARVODAYAM ROAD, KALLIYUR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

BY ADV.SRI.LIJU. M.P

¶14

RESPONDENT

¶15

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEMOM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. SAJJU.S

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18-01-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Hr....

¶19

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J

¶20

B.A Nos.34 & 67 of 2018

¶21

Dated this the 18^th day of January, 2018

¶22

ORDER

¶23

1.These petitions are filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶24

2.The petitioners in B.A No.34/2018 are the accused Nos. 4 and 7 and the petitioner in B.A No.67/2018 is the 5^th accused in Crime No.2820 of 2017 of Nemom Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 324 and 308 r/w Sec.14 of the IPC, 354 and 452.

¶25

3.Prosecution allegation is that on 17.12.2017, the petitioners herein wrongfully restrained the informant and the 1^st accused is alleged to have abused him and the 3^rd accused is alleged to have assaulted him with a helmet, causing injuries.

¶26

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the allegations are false. According to the learned counsel, the informant is a person having poor antecedents and this was questioned by the neighbors. No overt acts are alleged against the petitioners is the submission advanced to

¶27

B.A Nos.34 & 67 of 2018

¶28

¶29

canvas an order of pre-arrest bail.

¶30

5.The learned Public Prosecutor has made available the case diary. It appears that two incidents took place on 17.12.2017; the first one was at 7.00p.m., and the other was at 11.00p.m. However, it is submitted that no serious injuries were sustained by the victim.

¶31

6.Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the materials in support thereof, the role attributed to the petitioners, their antecedents and attendant facts and circumstances, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners do not appear to be warranted.

¶32

7.In result, these petitions are allowed. However, it shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶33

i). 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.

¶34

ii)The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 1a a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶35

B.A Nos.34 & 67 of 2018

¶36

¶37

iii)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 facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶38

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

¶39

v) If they surrender before the court concerned, this order shall not be applicable and the jurisdictional court may pass appropriate orders.

¶40

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.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,

JUDGE

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Suresh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh 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

Suresh M.G Vs Superintendent of Police, Kottayam

Thulaseedharan Pillai Vs State of Kerala

Jospin Raj Vs State of Kerala

Kochan Latheef Vs State of Kerala

P.G.Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Raju Vs the State of Kerala