Allowed

Vipin v. Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC12 Jul 2018CRL.A/856/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal, the Kerala High Court granted bail to the accused VIPIN charged with offence6 punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 447 r/w 149 of IPC and section3(1) of SC/ST Act. The court held that continuing custody was unwarranted and fixed bail conditions including a bond and appearance before IO as called for.

What did the court decide?

Accused granted bail subject to executing a bond for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties for the like sum each and appearing before IO as and when called.

Vipin Vs Sub Inspector of Police — Caste Atrocities | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

CRL.A.No. 856 of 2018

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 744/2018 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR CRIME NO. 240/2018 OF PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION , TRISSUR

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

VIPIN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAN, VADERIYATTIL VEEDU, MUNDUR, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV.SMT.M.R.JAYALATHA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶11

1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DIST-680545.

¶12

2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680101.

¶13

3. STATE OF KERALA,

¶14

REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶15

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶16

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR:SMT SREEJA V

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶19

=================

¶20

Crl.App. No.856 of 2018

¶21

=================

¶22

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2018

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Petitioner herein stands arrayed as the accused in Crime No.240 of 2018 of the Peramangalam Police Station for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 427, 447 r/w 149 of the Indain Penal Code and section 3(1)(g) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

¶25

It was alleged by the prosecution that, petitioner and six other identifiable persons trespassed into the property of the defacto complainant and destroyed a compound wall and committed a loss of Rs.15,000/- Crime was registered and investigation is progressing. In the meanwhile, petitioner sought anticipatory bail, which was declined by the learned Sessions Judge. It was challenged in Crl.Appeal.No.729 of 2018. This Court, by judgment dated 21.06.208 permitted the petitioner herein to surrender before the court below for the detailed reasons mentioned therein and to surrender before the investigating officer. Investigating officer was directed to interrogate the petitioner and if he was proposed to be arrested, he shall be produced before the court below on the same day. It was directed that the bail application shall be taken up on the same day. It was noted that the facts did not disclose the

¶26

Crl.A.856/18

¶27

¶28

absolute requirement of a custodial interrogation.

¶29

It appears that, petitioner herein surrendered before the investigating officer and in compliance with this Court's order, after interrogation, he was produced before the learned Sessions Judge. It seems that, without comprehending the spirit of the order of this Court, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the bail application and the petitioner was remanded. Petitioner seeks bail.

¶30

After having heard the learned Public Prosecutor, I am fully satisfied that the continuance of the petitioner herein in custody any further is absolutely unwarranted. Having considered this, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

¶31

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each before the court below.

¶32

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

¶33

investigation.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

SUNIL THOMAS Judge

¶36

Sbna/12/7/18

¶37

True Copy / P A to Judge

Vipin v. Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin v. Sub Inspector of Police

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

Sreejith S Vs State of Kerala

Sharon Prakash Vs Athira T.K.

P.v.Nandakumar Vs Rajeshwari

P.P.Mohammed Yaseen Vs Smt. N.Geetha

Midhun Vs State of Kerala

Surendran Vs Shihabudhin.T.a