Allowed

Antony v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Apr 2019Bail Appl./339/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Kerala released the sole accused on interim bail subject to specific conditions regarding cooperation with investigation and prohibition on approaching witnesses or the victim, after hearing opposing submissions from the Public Prosecutor.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 40,000 and furnishing two solvent sureties for the same sum, subject to strict conditions including immediate appearance for interrogati

Antony Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 339 of 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 419/2018 of SESIONS COURT,KALPETTA, WAYANAD DATED 05-01-2019

¶7

CRIME NO. 382/2018 OF Vythiri Police Station , Wayanad

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

ANTONY

¶10

AGED 51 YEARS S/O. P.A. JOSE, PALLITHARA HOUSE, VYTHIRI POST, KUNNATHIDAVAKA VILLAGE, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031

¶14

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER VYTHIRI POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN-673 576

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SRI.AMJAD ALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

B.A.No.339/2019

¶19

¶20

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶21

B.A.No.339 of 2019

¶22

Dated this the 5^th day of April, 2019

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.382/2018 of Vythiri Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 308, 294(b) of IPC.

¶25

The brief of the prosecution case is is that on 6.12.2018 at about 8.15 p.m at Vythiri town that the minor victim aged 15 years along with his uncle went to the petitioner's shop complaining that the petitioner's son Amal is causing nuisance and abusing the complainant whenever he sees him and that, at that time both Amal and the petitioner/accused were there in the shop and when the boy's uncle had questioned the impropriety of the petitioner's son abusing and assaulting the minor victim boy, the petitioner accused started abusing the uncle of the boy with obscene and abusive words and had voluntarily caused hurt by slapping on the face of the uncle of the boy. Thereafter, the petitioner/accused had taken a knife and attempted to stab him with intent to cause bodily injury likely to cause death and when the said stabbing was warded off, hit on his right hand causing injuries, thereby the petitioner committed the above said offences.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the

¶27

B.A.No.339/2019

¶28

¶29

above said allegations are falsely foisted against the petitioner and that admittedly, the scene of occurrence was the petitioner's shop and there was a quarrel in front of the vegetable shop run by the petitioner between the defacto complainant and his uncle and that they had committed mischief and damaged the glass and almirah of the petitioner's shop and threatening him with dare consequences etc. and that the petitioner had filed a complaint against the defacto complainant and his uncle and that the matters arose on account of the petty quarrel between the above said children and that the minor victim boy's uncle had interfered which had taken the disputes as aforestated etc.

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the plea for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶31

After having heard both sides and taking into account the facts and circumstances as disclosed in this application, the following directions and orders are passed:

¶32

i) The petitioner shall immediately appear before the investigating officer in connection with Crime No.382/2018 of Vythiri Police Station for interrogation process without any further delay at any rate by 10 a.m. on or before 17.4.2019.

¶33

ii) The investigating officer will conduct the interrogation on the same day. If the interrogation process is not completed on the same day, the investigating officer will be at liberty to direct the petitioner to appear before him for further interrogation on the next day or any day fixed by him, which the petitioner has to comply with.

¶34

iii) The petitioner will fully co-operate with the interrogation process. After the interrogation is over, in case the investigating officer arrests the petitioner, then he shall be released on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs.40,000/- each and on furnishing two solvent sureties for the like sum, both to the satisfaction of the investigating

B.A.No.339/2019

officer concerned.

Further it is also ordered that it will be subject to following

¶39

conditions:-

¶40

(i) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offences of similar nature.

¶41

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

¶42

(iii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required in that connection.

¶43

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

¶44

(v) The petitioner shall not go anywhere near the residence of the minor victim boy and his uncle and other family members or to the educational institution of the minor victim boy, until the conclusion of the trial in this case.

¶45

If there is any violation of the abovesaid conditions by the petitioner, then the jurisdictional court concerned stand hereby empowered, to consider the plea for cancellation of bail at the appropriate time.

¶46

With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application stands allowed.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.

¶49

Acd

¶50

// TRUE COPY //

¶51

PS TO JUDGE

Antony v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony 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

Manikantan Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Fajas Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rahman Vs Vaheeda Kuttiyil

P.M.Mohammed Ashraf, Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Niyas Vs State of Kerala

Sathi Vs State of Kerala