Allowed

Noble v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Oct 2018Bail Appl./4856/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a preventive bail application filed by Noble, the second accused, in a case involving offences under Sections 294(b), 353, and 341 IPC. The court exempted the applicant from interrogations deemed unnecessary due to serious injuries, granted bail subject to specific conditions including personal appearance Saturdays, and directed release on security upon arrest. The order emp

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on executing a bond for Rs.50,000 with two sureties, conditioned to appear Saturdays for one month, cooperate with investigation, and not intimidate witnesses or commit offences.

Noble 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 11TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4856 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO.172/2018 OF THANKAMANI POLICE STATION, IDUKKI

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

NOBLE, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O JOHNY, JO FAMILY HOUSE, UDAYAGIRI.P.O, THANKAMANI VILLAGE,IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.JOBI A. THAMPI

¶10

SRI.GEM KORASON

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶13

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THANKAMANI POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685602.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of

¶18

Criminal Procedure.

¶19

The applicant herein is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.172 of

¶20

2018 registered at the Thankamani Police Station. In the aforesaid

¶21

BA:4856/18

¶22

¶23

crime, he along with accused Nos.1 and 3 are being proceeded against for having committed offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 353 and 341 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.

¶24

The applicant herein was stabbed on his abdomen by one Abhilash, on 3.6.2018, and the people who had collected at the spot, removed him to the Thankamony Co-operative Hospital. The accused Nos.1 and 3, who took the applicant to the hospital, picked up a skirmish with the casualty doctor. It is alleged that they closed the door of the casualty room from outside and wrongfully confined the doctor. They also committed mischief and caused loss to the tune of Rs.1,000/-. Immediately, the police were called to the spot. It is alleged that the accused Nos.1 and 3 wrongfully restrained and by their acts, deterred the police personnel from discharging their official duties.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant had suffered very serious stab injuries at the hands of one Abhilash and Crime No.175 of 2018 has been registered against the said accused. When the people who accompanied him felt that proper treatment was not being imparted to the applicant, they had questioned the doctor and requested for a reference. This resulted in an altercation between the accused Nos.

¶26

BA:4856/18

¶27

¶28

1 and 3 and hospital personnel. When these incidents were taking place, the applicant herein was lying on a stretcher. It is further submitted that the applicant was later taken to the Taluk Hospital, Thankamani, for treatment. It is urged that urgent intervention had to be made to prevent blood loss and save the life of the applicant. The overt acts were all committed by the accused Nos.1 and 3 and they were arrested and remanded. The applicant had no role to play, according to the learned counsel.

¶29

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the applicant herein had sustained serious injuries in the prior incident and he was incapacitated. No serious objection is raised in granting bail to the applicant, in the facts and circumstances. He concurs with the submission of the learned counsel that the accused Nos.1 and 3 have been arrested.

¶30

I have considered the submissions advanced. Having gone through the materials on record, it appears that the applicant herein had sustained serious injuries in the earlier incident. The over acts were all committed by accused Nos.1 and 3. In that view of the matter, the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear to be necessary for an effective investigation in the instant case.

¶31

BA:4856/18

¶32

¶33

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above

¶34

order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶35

i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶36

ii) He 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.

¶37

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

¶38

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.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶41

krj

¶42

//True Copy// P.A.To Judge

Noble v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noble 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

Jani Vs State of Kerala

Sunil Kumar K.P. Vs State of Kerala

Rajeevan Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil Vs State of Kerala

Fousia Vs the State of Kerala

Noble Vs State of Kerala