Allowed

Pramod Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Oct 2020Bail Appl./2324/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons charged with kidnapping, robbery, and cheating, directing them to surrender for interrogation and imposing standard bail conditions including a bond amount and restrictions on influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applications for anticipatory bail allowed; directed to surrender within two weeks and execute bonds for Rs.50,000 each with two sureties.

Pramod Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 13TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.2324 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.502/2019 OF KORATTI POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

PRAMOD KUMAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.CHAKRAPANI, KADEPARAMBIL, CHIRAKAYAM, VARAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT.ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHY

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-682031.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER - SR.PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2020, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2209/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶20

MONDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 13TH ASWINA, 1942

¶21

Bail Appl..No.2209 OF 2020

¶22

CRIME NO.502/2019 OF KORATTI POLICE STATION , THRISSUR

¶23

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4:

¶24

ANUROOP, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.AMBUJAKSHAN, CHIRAKAYAM, VARAPPUZHA, ERNAKULAM.

¶25

BY ADV. SMT.ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHY

¶26

RESPONDENT:

¶27

STATE OF KERALA, SHO, KORATTI POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶28

OTHER PRESENT:

¶29

SRI.SANTHOSH PETER - SR.PP

¶30

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2020, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2324/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020

¶32

¶33

COMMON ORDER

¶34

[B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020]

¶35

Dated this the 05th day of October, 2020

¶36

APPLICATIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL

¶37

The applicant in B.A.No.2324 of 2020 is the 2^nd accused, while the applicant in B.A.No.2209 of 2020 is the 4^th accused in Crime No.502 of 2019 of Koratti Police Station, Thrissur, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 342, 395, 412, 414 of the IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

¶38

On 29.07.2019, at about 10.30 PM, the defacto complainant, who was driving a lorry bearing Reg.No.TS-12-UB-6222, with a consignment from Mattancherry to Hyderabad, carrying offal, and reached Koratti, where he parked the lorry beside the road for having food. The applicants and the other accused allegedly came in an Innova car, intimidated him and dragged him into the car. Thereafter, the lorry was driven by one among the accused, taken to an isolated place, where from the offal inside the lorry worth Rs.2 Lakhs was transferred to another lorry and the defacto complainant,

¶39

B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020

¶40

¶41

as well as the cleaner of the lorry, was abandoned. It is stated that the stolen offal was subsequently sold at Hyderabad and the sales proceeds were appropriated. The applicants thus committed the offence. The 1^st accused was arrested and he was remanded to judicial custody. Thereafter, he approached this Court for regular bail and vide order dated 25.02.2020 in B.A.No.604 of 2020, he was released on bail on certain conditions. Similarly, some other accused also, who were arrested, were released on regular bail, while some others were granted anticipatory bail as well. Accused 1 to 4 are assumed to be the main perpetrators of the crime of having kidnapped the lorry driver and cleaner and thereafter, robbed the offal inside the lorry with the help of the other co-accused.

¶42

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail, mainly on the ground that they do not have any criminal antecedents. The lorry, as well as the other articles, have already been seized and there is nothing more to be recovered from the applicants. The specific case of the prosecution is that the stolen material has been sold and the money was appropriated by the accused in this crime. Hence, custodial interrogation of the applicants

¶43

B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020

¶44

¶45

does not appear to be very essential for the purpose of investigation. The investigation is almost complete and the incident had occurred more than a year ago. I, therefore, find that incarceration of the applicants particularly, in these pandemic times may not be essential, considering their antecedents.

¶46

In the result, the application is allowed and the applicants are directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and after interrogation, in the event of they being arrested, they shall be released on bail on the execution of bonds for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only), each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer and on following further conditions:

¶47

(i) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

¶48

(ii) They shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

¶49

(iii) They shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

¶50

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the

¶51

B.A.Nos.2324 & 2209 OF 2020

¶52

¶53

prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail.

¶54

The bail application is allowed.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

ASHOK MENON JUDGE

¶57

NR/05/10/20

Pramod Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar 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

Muhammed Nazim K.S Vs State of Kerala

Shihana.S Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sharafudheen Vs State of Kerala

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Anuroop, Vs State of Kerala

K Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala