Partly allowed

Sarath Chandran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Nov 2018Bail Appl./6134/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 452, 427, 324, 323, 241, and 34 of the IPC, the Court granted pre-arrest bail to the second petitioner (third accused) subject to conditions but dismissed the application for the first petitioner, permitting surrender instead for recovery purposes.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the second petitioner on specific conditions; first petitioner's bail dismissed but surrender permitted for recovery.

Sarath Chandran 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 SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6134 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 1365/2018 OF Hill Palace Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:ACCUSED NO.1 & 3

¶8

1 SARATH CHANDRAN AGED 35 YEARS S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, KALLUVEETTIL HOUSE, VELLANGHI THERUVU, TRIPUNITHURA.

¶9

2 MANEESH E.K. AGED 30 YEARS S/O. KRISHNAN, EDAMPADATH HOUSE, VELLANGHI THERUVU, TRIPUNITHURA.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.SABU SRI.AKHIL K SABU

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

PP AJITH MURALI

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Bail Appl..No. 6134 of 2018

¶17

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioners are accused No. 1 and 3 in crime no.1365/2018 of Hill palace Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 427, 324, 323, 241 and 34 of IPC.

¶20

According to the prosecution, on 15.8.2018 at 4.30 pm the petitioners trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and attacked him and his brother. One person sustained injuries and he was rushed to the hospital.

¶21

The petitioners herein claiming that it was not a premeditated act and that they have not committed any of the acts as alleged, seek pre-arrest bail. It was contended that all other accused were granted pre-arrest bail by Annexure A3 order.

¶22

It seems that specific overt act is attributed towards the first accused herein. The role attributed to the 2^nd petitioner who is the third accused appears to be less.

¶23

Having considered these facts, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the 2^nd petitioner, who is the 3^rd

¶24

Bail Appl..No. 6134 of 2018

¶25

¶26

accused on the following conditions:

¶27

(i) The 2^nd petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of .40,000 (Rupees forty thousand only) with two sureties₹ for the like sum each.

¶28

(ii) He shall co-operate with the investigation.

¶29

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.

¶30

(iv) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.

¶31

(v) He shall not get involved in any other crime.

¶32

The bail application of the first accused, who is the first petitioner is dismissed. However he is permitted to surrender before the investigating officer within ten days. After interrogation, identification and recovery of any weapon, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate on the same day and the learned magistrate shall take up and pass appropriate orders on his bail application, with notice to the learned APP on the same day, having due regard to the fact that

¶33

Bail Appl..No. 6134 of 2018

¶34

¶35

the other accused were granted anticipatory bail, the purpose of surrender was for the purpose of recovery and also that the first petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

SD/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

shg

Sarath Chandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarath Chandran 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

Jayaram.v Iyyer Vs State of Kerala

S.L.P. Kunhibi @ Kunjalima Vs State of Kerala

Sasi @ Sivaramakrishnan Vs Deepa

Lithin Vs the State of Kerala

Babu T.D. @ Mathai Vs State of Kerala

Renjith Ambadi, Vs the State of Kerala