Allowed

Anil Jacob v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Mar 2019Bail Appl./1884/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a bail application filed by accused persons under Section 438 Cr.P.C. recognizing that custodial interrogation was not necessary and directing their release subject to standard conditions including bond, reporting, and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail in connection with Crime No. 414 of 2019, bond of Rs. 40,000 each with two sureties.

Anil Jacob Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 414/2019 OF Palarivattom Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 ANIL JACOB,AGED 48 YEARS S/O PHILIP JACOB,FLAT NO.19 A,PANJOSE GARDENS, PAVOOR ROAD,PADIVATTOM,KOCHI-24.

¶9

2 SHYAMKUMAR.K,AGED 40 YEARS S/O P.ASHOKAN,FLAT NO.5E,PANJOSE GARDENS, PAVOOR ROAD,PADIVATTOM,KOCHI-24.

¶10

3 SANTHOSH KUMAR.P,AGED 43 YEARS FLAT NO.10F,PANJOSE GARDENS,PAVOOR ROAD, PADIVATTOM,KOCHI-24.

¶11

BY ADVS.

¶12

SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶15

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682025.

¶16

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶17

-2-

¶18

3 AJI KOCHUPARAMBIL AGED 45 YEARS, S/O LATE EMMANUEL K GEORGE, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF FLAT NO.20, PANJOS GARDENS, PADIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM.

¶19

IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 22.3.2019 IN CRL.MA NO.1/2019 IN BA-1884/2019.

¶20

BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR SRI.G.RENJITH SRI.S.M.PRASANTH SRI.T.H.ARAVIND SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI

¶21

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶23

-3-

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 414 of 2019 of Palarivattom Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 341, 323, 324, 452 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC.

¶26

The prosecution allegation is that on 2-2-2019 at 10.45 p.m., the petitioners trespassed into the flat of the de facto complainant and uttered abusive words against him. The petitioners also wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and attacked him with a weapon.

¶27

The petitioners have filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and the learned Senior Advocate Sri. K.Ramakumar for the 3rd respondent.

¶29

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶30

-4-

¶31

The learned Senior counsel for the 3rd respondent has opposed the application contending that the petitioners are involved in another offence also.

¶32

It appears that the petitioners are also involved in Crime No. 1259 of 2017 of Palarivattom Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 403 and 406 read with Section 34 IPC. The said crime arose out of the dispute with regard to the payment of tax in respect of the Flat. In connection with the incident in this case, another case was also registered as Crime No. 413 of 2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 341, 323, 451, 354 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC. The de facto complainant herein and other persons are the accused in Crime No. 413 of 2019. It appears that both sides exchanged blows. It further appears that the de facto complainant is involved in other offences also.

¶33

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of

¶34

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶35

-5-

¶36

the petitioners is not necessary in this case. In the said circumstances, an order Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners will be justified.

¶37

In the result, this application stands allowed, and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to release the petitioners on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 414 of 2019 of Palarivattom Police Station, on condition of each of the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the 2nd respondent, before whom the petitioners shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime, and subject to the following further conditions:-

¶38

(i) The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. for three months and thereafter, as and when required by the investigating officer for interrogation.

¶39

Bail Appl..No. 1884 of 2019

¶40

-6-

¶41

(ii) The petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses or in any way tamper with the investigation.

¶42

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

¶43

Dated this the 27^th day of March, 2019.

¶44

Sd/- B.Sudheendra Kumar, Judge

¶45

/true copy/

¶46

ani/

Anil Jacob v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Jacob 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

Sarath Soman Vs State of Kerala

Ajas.K.H Vs State of Kerala

Vinod Vs State of Kerala

V.K.Bindu, Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Babu Vs the State of Kerala

Devadas Vs State of Kerala