Allowed

Sushilkumar, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jul 2019Bail Appl./1597/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam allowed a bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for the petitioner, who was the second accused in a cheating and forgery case. The court granted anticipatory bail on the basis that the entire money was received by the first accused, no recovery was expected, and the petitioner had no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail on execution of a bond for Rs. 40,000 with two solvent sureties, subject to reporting conditions and restrictions on tampering with witnesses or committing further

Sushilkumar, Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 14TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.1597 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO.142/2019 OF Koothattukulam Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

SUSHILKUMAR, AGED 27 YEARS S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KALPARAMBA, POOMANGALAM, EDAKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN SRI.PREMSON PAUL

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, (SHO, KOOTTATTUKULAM POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶12

2 ADDL.R2 AMAL P.NOBLE S/O NOBLE P.KURIAKOSE, PARAPPILLIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, ALLAPRA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683513.

¶13

IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13.3.2019 IN CRL.M.A NO.1/2019 IN BA-1597/2019.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SMT.V.SREEJA,PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Case No. BA 1597/19

¶18

-2-

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.142

¶21

of 2019 of Koothattukulam Police Station registered for the

¶22

offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with

¶23

Section 34 IPC.

¶24

The petitioner has filed this application praying for

¶25

the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶26

Heard

¶27

The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that

¶28

the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It has been

¶29

further submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the entire money was received by the first accused and not the

¶30

petitioner. It appears that no recovery is to be effected from

¶31

the petitioner. Therefore, the custodial interrogation of the

¶32

petitioner is not necessary in this case. That apart, the

¶33

Case No. BA 1597/19

¶34

-3-

¶35

petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, I am inclined to grant the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner.

¶36

In the result, this application stands allowed and the first respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the above crime on condition of the petitioner executing a bond for Rs.40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand only), with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer concerned, before whom the petitioner shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following conditions:

¶37

(i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. for three months and thereafter, as and when required by the

¶38

Case No. BA 1597/19

¶39

-4-

¶40

Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶41

(ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or

¶42

influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶43

(iii) The petitioner shall not get involved in any other offence during the pendency of this case.

¶44

¶45

B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE .

¶46

dl/

Sushilkumar, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushilkumar, 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

Santhamma Vs State of Kerala

Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

Francis Vs State of Kerala

Victim Vs Pappachan.C.P

Boban Joseph, Vs State of Kerala

Aby George Vs the State of Kerala