Partly allowed

Sujin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Mar 2018Bail Appl./855/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Bail was rejected for a petitioner not named in the FIR but allowed for another petitioner alleged with wrongful restraint, imposing standard conditions on release.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail rejected for first petitioner; allowed for second petitioner with a bond of Rs. 25,000 and conditions to appear before the IO and not leave Kerala.

Sujin Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 855 of 2018

¶6

(CRIME NO. 65/2018 OF ATTINGAL POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANTAPURAM)

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/6TH AND 7TH ACCUSED:

¶8

1 SUJIN, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. SUBHA S S NIVAS, AYILAM, MUDAKKAL VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM.

¶9

2 SUMESH, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. SREELATH SURABHI NIVAS, KATTUCHANTHA AYILAM ELAMBA, MUDAKKAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADV.SRI.M.R.SARIN PANICKER

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ATTINGAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.P. UDAYAKUMAR.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J.

¶17

B.A. No.855 of 2018

¶18

Dated this the 6^th day of March, 2018

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶21

This application is filed by the 7^th accused in Crime No.65/2018 of Attingal Police Station and also another person claiming to be the 6^th accused in that case. The case against the accused is registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 324 and 308 r/w Section 149 IPC.

¶22

The prosecution case is that on 7.1.2018, at about 21.30 hours, at the place Kaattuchanda Junction, the first accused beat on the head of the de facto complainant with an iron rod causing injury to his head and that he made attempt to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. It is also alleged that the second and the third accused beat the de facto complainant with the iron rod and that the other accused

¶23

B.A. No.855 of 2018

¶24

-2-

¶25

wrongfully restrained him.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the report filed by the Investigating Officer.

¶27

The first petitioner in the application is a person by name Sujin. However, the report of the investigating officer shows that there is no such person arrayed as accused in the case. The name of the 6^th accused in the case is Subin and not Sujin. Since the first petitioner is not an accused in the case, the prayer for granting him anticipatory bail is liable to be rejected.

¶28

There is no allegation against the second petitioner

¶29

that he used any deadly weapon to attack the de facto complainant. The allegation against him is only that he wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant. The overt act of beating on the head of the de facto complainant was committed by the third accused. Custodial interrogation of the second petitioner appears to be not necessary to have an effective investigation in the case. Considering the role of the

¶30

B.A. No.855 of 2018

¶31

-3-

¶32

second petitioner in the incident, I find that the discretion of the Court can be exercised in his favour to grant him prearrest bail.

¶33

In the result, the prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the first petitioner is rejected. The prayer for granting anticipatory bail to the second petitioner is allowed and it is ordered as follows:

¶34

(i) The second petitioner (Sumesh) shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties each for the like amount in the event of his arrest by the police in Crime No.65 of 2018 of the Attingal Police Station.

¶35

(ii) The second petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Saturdays for a period of two months after being released on bail.

¶36

(iii) The second petitioner shall not in any manner intimidate or influence the prosecution witnesses in the case.

¶37

(iv) The second petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the jurisdictional court concerned.

¶38

B.A. No.855 of 2018

¶39

-4-

¶40

(v) The second petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him in writing to do so.

¶41

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI JUDGE

¶42

Scl/06.03.2018

Sujin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujin 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

V.P.Hisham Vs State of Kerala

Faleel v. Vs Sho, Kannur Town Police Station

Thomas @ Tomy Vs State of Kerala

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Aseer A.P Vs State of Kerala

P.J.Ancily, Son of Joseph Vs State of Kerala