Allowed

Marimuthu @ Sreedhar @ Mohammed Ashraf v. the Inspector of Police

Kerala HC10 Jul 2018Bail Appl./4453/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding murder, robbery, and forgery, the Court directed the lower court to expedite the matter previously. Considering the delay in trial and the awaited FSL report, the Court granted bail on conditions including bond execution, passport surrender, and non-interference with investigation. Thin

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on conditions: bond of 75,000 with sureties, surrender passport within 7 days, appear when called, no interference with investigation or witnesses.

Marimuthu @ Sreedhar @ Mohammed Ashraf Vs the Inspector of… — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 4453 of 2018

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN Bail Appl. 7229/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA CRIME NO. 37/2017 OF MANJESWAR POLICE STATION, KASARGOD

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/1ST ACCUSED

¶7

MARIMUTHU @ SREEDHAR @ MOHAMMED ASHRAF, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. RAMASWAMI, AAGRAHARAM, KUDIYIRIPPU COLONY, ATHANI POST, ARUNDENKI TALUK, PUTHUKOTTAI, TAMILNADU. NOW R/AT PERVODI, GANGADUKKA, BERIPADAVU, BAYAR, MANJESHWAR TALUK.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR SMT.ANN SUSAN GEORGE

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND STATE

¶10

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANJESHWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD - 671 121.

¶11

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

¶12

R BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REKHA C. NAIR

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Pn 10/07

¶15

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶16

B. A. No. 4453 of 2018

¶17

Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2018

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.37/2017 of Manjeshwar Police Station, Kasaragod for offences punishable under Sections 302, 397, 212 and 213 of IPC. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner herein and the 2^nd accused had caused death of the victim for the purpose of committing robbery of 2,40,000/-. Petitioner was arrested on 02.02.2017 and is in₹ custody since then. Final report has been laid after investigation.

¶20

Having regard to the serious nature of allegations, this Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. However, by an order of this Court dated 14.11.2017, the court below was directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within five months.

¶21

It has now been informed that FSL report is still awaited. There is no likelihood of the matter being taken up in the immediate future for trial. Having considered these facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Hence, the bail application is allowed on the following conditions:

¶23

B. A. No. 4453 of 2018

¶24

¶25

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of 75,000/-₹ (Rupees seventy five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶26

(ii) He shall surrender his passport within 7 days from the date of execution of the bond and if not, file an affidavit in this regard before the jurisdictional court. However, further directions regarding the release of the passport will be within the jurisdiction of the concerned jurisdictional court.

¶27

(iii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

¶28

(iv) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant and the witnesses nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶31

Pn 10/07

Marimuthu @ Sreedhar @ Mohammed Ashraf v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marimuthu @ Sreedhar @ Mohammed Ashraf v. the 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

Anilkumar Vs Shalini

Muhammed Shereef Vs State of Kerala

Dulcine Jochim Fonseca Vs State of Kerala

Madhu v. Vs State of Kerala

Remitha Vs State of Kerala

Vinod Vs State of Kerala