Allowed

Sreelesh v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Oct 2019Bail Appl./7293/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application under Section 438 CrPC filed by the petitioner accused of assault during a police patrol. The judge concluded that custodial interrogation was not necessary given the lack of serious injuries and the petitioner's lack of criminal record.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; bail granted with bond of Rs.50,000/- and conditions to cooperate with investigation and appear on Saturdays.

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

¶1

B.A. NO. 7293 OF 2019 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶5

SATURDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 4TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶6

Bail Appl..No.7293 OF 2019

¶7

CRIME NO.671/2019 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

SREELESH

¶10

AGED 33 YEARS S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, CHERUVATH PURATH HOUSE, KUNNATHARA.P.O, OLLOOR, ULLIYERI, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN-673620

¶11

BY ADV. SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR)

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31

¶14

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYILANDY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE RURAL, PIN673001

¶15

SRI. REMESH CHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶19

On 11.09.2019, Crime No.671 of 2019 was registered at the

¶20

B.A. NO. 7293 OF 2019 2

¶21

Koyilandy Police Station suo motu by the Sub Inspector of that station arraying four identifiable persons as accused. It is alleged that on the same day at about 6 p.m., while the officer and his party were engaged in patrol duty, they received information about an altercation between two groups of persons in front of the Park Residency Bar Hotel. In order to disperse the fighting mob, the police had to use reasonable force. One person is alleged to have thrown a broken beer bottle on the police personnel causing injuries.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the

¶23

applicant herein is innocent. He would further contend that the other accused was granted an order of pre-arrest bail by this Court by order dated 15.10.2019.

¶24

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor who has opposed the prayer.

¶25

I have considered the submissions advanced and have perused the records. From the wound certificate dated 11.09.2019, it appears that the only injury suffered by the informant is an abrasion on the left elbow. Prosecution records reveal that the police had used force to disperse the mob which had gathered out side the hotel. Having regard to the role assigned to the applicant, the seriousness of the injuries inflicted and his lack of criminal antecedents, I am of the view that his custodial interrogation is not required for an effective investigation.

¶26

In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be

¶27

B.A. NO. 7293 OF 2019 3

¶28

released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

¶29

thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order

¶30

shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶31

i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

¶32

ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶33

iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

¶34

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court

¶35

shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, V.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

pkk

Sreelesh v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreelesh v. the 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

Ajith Thomson, Vs State of Kerala

Deepa Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh C. M. Vs State of Kerala

Mohanan K Vs State of Kerala

Greesh P.S. Vs State of Kerala

Aslam Vs State of Kerala