Allowed

Vishnu @ Kunjunni, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Oct 2018Bail Appl./5943/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed this application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court noted the accidently delayed FIR and lack of serious injuries despite allegations of weapon use. Bail was granted subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties each for Rs. 50,000, subject to conditions regarding interrogation appearance and behavior.

Vishnu @ Kunjunni, 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 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 30TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5943 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 1047/2018 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

VISHNU @ KUNJUNNI, AGED 25 YEARS S/O SATHYAPALAM, MARTHANDAVILAKAMVEEDU,KARICHARA, PALLIPURAM P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.KABIL CHANDRAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA,

¶12

REP ; BY SI OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031

¶13

BY SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C. N. PRABHAKARAN.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This application is filed under §438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶17

The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No. 1047

¶18

of 2018 registered at the Mangalapuram Police Station. In the aforesaid crime, he is being proceeded against for having committed offences punishable under §§ 294(b), 341, 323, 452,

¶19

Bail Appl..No. 5943 of 2018

¶20

¶21

324 and §506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

On 07.06.2018 at 7.50 pm, the applicant herein is alleged to have trespassed into the residential home of the de facto complainant and after abusing him, he is alleged to have attacked him with a beer bottle.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the allegations are not true. It is submitted that a minor altercation had taken place between the applicant herein and the de facto complainant in connection with a mobile phone. However, no injuries were sustained by either parties. It is further submitted that though the incident had allegedly taken place on 7.6.2018, the Crime was registered only after two days.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor has refuted the contentions of the learned counsel. However, it is fairly submitted that no other crimes are registered against the applicant herein and the wound certificate does not reveal that any serious injuries were inflicted.

¶25

I have considered the submissions advanced and have

¶26

gone through the materials made available. Though it is alleged that a beer bottle was used to inflict a blow on the head,

¶27

Bail Appl..No. 5943 of 2018

¶28

¶29

corresponding injuries are not seen sustained. Furthermore, there is some delay in setting the law in motion. In view of the clean antecedents of the applicant, I am of the view that by imposing stringent conditions, his custodial interrogation can be dispensed with.

¶30

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 Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. However, the above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶31

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturdays between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. for a period of two months or till final report is filed whichever is earlier.

¶32

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.

¶33

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

¶34

Bail Appl..No. 5943 of 2018

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

accordance with the law.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶40

Dxy

Vishnu @ Kunjunni, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu @ Kunjunni, 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

C.P.Prakash Vs State of Kerala

C.P.Prakash Vs State of Kerala

Thomas P.J. Vs the State of Kerala

Ashin Vs State of Kerala

Adarsh Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Manaf Vs State of Kerala