Allowed

Deepak@Deepu, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jun 2019Bail Appl./2581/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Court directed petitioners to appear for interrogation by 5.07.2019. Bail was granted conditionally upon release by the Investigating Officer after interrogation, subject to a bond and strict conditions to cooperate with investigation and not tamper with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted conditionally to be executed after Interpolatory Officer clears for arrest; directed to appear for interrogation by 5.07.2019.

Deepak@Deepu, Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 31ST JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.2581 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO.132/2019 OF KAIPAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR ,

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 DEEPAK@DEEPU, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.KORUTTY, MANAPPULLY VEEDU, EDATHURUTHY MURI, EDATHURUTHY VILLAGE, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

2 BIJI, AGED 32 YEARS W/O.DEEPAK, -DO-

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.JAISHANKAR

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶13

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KAIPAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶14

SRI.T.R.RENJITH, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

B.A. No. 2581 of 2019

¶18

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶19

B.A. No. 2581 of 2019

¶20

Dated this the 21^st day of June, 2019

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Petitioners herein are the two accused in the instant crime No. 132 of 2019 of Kaipamangalam Police Station which have been registered for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,324,325,308,294(b), 506 read with 34 of IPC & 77 of Juvenile Justice Act.

¶23

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 20.01.2019 at about 01.p.m, at the front portion of the property, the 1^st petitioner (A1) had uttered obscene words and threatened the defacto complaint with death and second petitioner (A2) wrongfully restrained him and then the first petitioner had beat on the complainant's right shoulder with a rafter causing deep injury and fisted on his mouth causing loss of one tooth and thereafter, brandished a sword against him and it would have caused the death of the complainant etc.

¶24

The petitioners would point out that the above said allegations have been falsely foisted on them and that the defacto complainant's mother and wife had applied for a sanction of loan in the flood relief programme and since only one affected persons of the family could be given the relief, it was given to only one among them and the defacto complainant was entertaining the misunderstanding that this was on account of the intervention of the second petitioner, who is a resourced person the kudumbasree in the area and

¶25

¶26

B.A. No. 2581 of 2019

¶27

enraged by this, the defacto complainant on the same day (20.01.2019) at 1.00 p.m. had attacked the second petitioner herein and she was immediately admitted to C ommunity Health Center Hospital, Valappad, on the same day and the police had registered Crime No.73 of 2019 against the defacto complainant herein arrayed as accused on the basis of the complaint by the second petitioner herein and later, he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody and it is only to wreck vengeance on the petitioners that the above said false complaint has been preferred on the basis of First Information Statement given by the defacto complainant herein, subsequently on 12.02.2019 which is about more than 3 weeks after the alleged occurrence of the incident on 20.01.2019, that as the injured in Crime No. 73 of 2019, second petitioner herein has suffered lacerated wound on the left forearm and aberrations on her left breast etc as evident from Annexure A2 wound certificate issued by the Government Hospital on the same day.

¶28

Having regard to the rival submission on both sides and careful evaluation of fact and circumstances of this case, the following directions and orders are passed.

¶29

1. The petitioners will immediately personally appear before the Investigating Officer in Crime No 132/2019 of Kaipamangalam Police Station for interrogation purposes without any further delay at any rate , by 10 am on any day on or before 05.07.2019.

¶30

2. The petitioners will fully co-operate with the Investigating

¶31

¶32

B.A. No. 2581 of 2019

¶33

Officer in the conduct of the above interrogation process.

¶34

3. After the interrogation process is over, in case the Investigating Officer arrests the petitioners in relation to the above said crime, then they shall be released on bail on separately executing bond for Rs.40,000/- each and separately furnishing two solvent sureties for the like sum, each to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned.

¶35

Further it is also ordered that the grant of bail will be subject to

¶36

following conditions:-

¶37

i. The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar nature.

¶38

ii. The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation. iii.The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when required in that connection.

¶39

iv.The petitioners shall not influence witness or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner, whatsoever.

¶40

If there is any violation of the above said conditions by the petitioners

¶41

then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby empowered, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the appropriate time.

¶42

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application will stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

JUDGE

rpk

Deepak@Deepu, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak@Deepu, 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

Midhun Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Pushpakaran Vs the State of Kerala

Siyar Manuraj Vs State of Kerala

Salam Vs State of Kerala

Sakkeer Hussain Vs Fousiya

Swetha Ann Varghese Vs State of Kerala