Allowed

Sreejith.S.S v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Apr 2019Bail Appl./2312/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary, considering the petitioners were political leaders arraigned without being named in the FIR, and granted bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners enlarged on bail on executing a bail bond for Rs.40,000/- each with two solvent sureties and complying with the stipulated conditions.

Sreejith.S.S 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

THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 21ST CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2312 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 19/2019 OF Nedumangad Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 SREEJITH.S.S AGED 23 YEARS S/O. SURESH KUMAR, PULLEKONATHU HOUSE, PULIPPARA, NEDUMANGAD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

2 ABHIJITH A.M, AGED 23 YEARS S/O. ASHOKAN, KALLUVILAKATHU VVEEDU,M MUTHAMKONAM, MELAMCODE, NEDUMANGAD P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.D.FEROZE SRI.K.ANAND (A-1921) SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031 (CRIME NO. 19/2019 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT)

¶13

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 541 (CRIME NO. 19/2019 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT)

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Bail Appl..No. 2312 of 2019

¶18

-2-

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioners are accused Nos. 3 and 4 in Crime No. 19 of 2019 of Nedumangad Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452 427 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶21

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

¶22

Heard.

¶23

The incident in this case was on 3-1-2019 at 1.30 p.m. A hartal was called by a political party on that day in connection with the issue relating to the entry of women of a particular age group to Sabarimala Temple.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioners has

¶25

Bail Appl..No. 2312 of 2019

¶26

-3-

¶27

submitted that since the petitioners are local leaders of a political party, the petitioners were arraigned as accused in the crime. It appears that the names of the petitioners are not figured in the FIR.

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary in this case. In the said circumstances, an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioners will be justified.

¶29

In the result, this application stands allowed, and the petitioners shall be enlarged on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 19 of 2019 of Nedumangad 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:-

¶30

Bail Appl..No. 2312 of 2019

¶31

-4-

¶32

(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.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

Dated this the 11^th day of April, 2019.

¶36

Sd/-B.Sudheendra Kumar, Judge

¶37

ani/

¶38

/true copy/

Sreejith.S.S v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreejith.S.S 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

Joseph Mathew Vs the Station House Officer

Suresh Babu.S. Vs State of Kerala

Mohamed Ismail, Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Mohan Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Mahesh Vs State of Kerala