Partly allowed

Prasannan T.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Nov 2020Bail Appl./7729/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application was disposed of differently for five accused persons. Accused 1, 2, and 4 were denied anticipatory bail due to criminal antecedents, ordered to surrender, and further bail consideration linked to investigation cooperation. Accused 3 and 5 were granted anticipatory bail subject to strict conditions regarding interrogation, sureties, and social distancing.

What did the court decide?

Bail denied to Accused 1, 2, 4; Bail granted to Accused 3, 5 with conditions for surety, interrogation, and social distancing.

Prasannan T.K. Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.801/2020 OF Kalamassery Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

1 PRASANNAN T.K. AGED 42 YEARS THEROTH HOUSE, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 682024 PIN-682024

¶9

2 RAHUL T M ALIAS KANNAN AGED 23 YEARS THEROTH HOUSE, EDAPPALLY P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682024

¶10

3 SHAJI C M AGED 26 YEARS CHAMAPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-682024 4. SHARATH P SHAJI AGED 21 YEARS PERINGOTTIL HOUSE, THRIKKANARVATTOM NORTH VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-683104

¶11

5. BINEESH C B ALIAS APPU AGED 23 YEARS CHAMAPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAPPALLY P O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-682024

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU

¶13

RESPONDENT:

¶14

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶15

¶16

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA PIN-682031

¶17

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶18

SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PP

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

Dated this the 26th day of November 2020

¶24

This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

¶25

2. The Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.801/2020 of Kalamasserry Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 143,146,147,323,452 and 354 read with 149 of I.P.C.

¶26

3. The prosecution case is that, the petitioners formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object of the assembly, trespassed in to the house of the defacto complainant on 18-10-2020 at 6 p.m., and attacked the defacto complainant. It is also alleged that, the first accused outraged the modesty of the defacto complainant.

¶27

There is specific overt act attributed to the main accused in this case.

¶28

¶29

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶30

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the non bailable offence alleged in this case are Sections 452 and 354 I.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, these offences will not attract. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, if the prosecution case is accepted, the intention of the petitioners is only to assault the injured. In such situation, the offence under Section 354 I.P.C.is not prima facie made out. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the allegation that the petitioners have got criminal antecedents is not a reason to deny bail to them. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, all the cases registered against the petitioners are long back and there is no case registered against them recently. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grant them bail.

¶31

¶32

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶33

5. The learned Public Prosecutor very seriously opposed the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor made available the report submitted by the Sub Inspector, Kalamassery Police Station dated 25.11.2020, in which it is stated that, there are 16 cases registered against the first petitioner / first accused. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, there are 3 cases registered at Eloor Police Station and the remaining cases were registered at Kalamassery Police Station. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, as far as the 2^nd accused is concerned, 4 cases are registered against him. In the report it is stated that, there are 2 cases registered against the 3^rd accused and 3 cases were registered against the 4^th accused. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that,

¶34

the petitioners have got criminal antecedents. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that, accused Nos.1 to 4 are involved in crime No.801/2020 of Kalamassery Police Station. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

¶35

¶36

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶37

6. After hearing both sides, I think, accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 are not entitled orders under Section 438 Cr.P.C.. As far as the 3^rd accused is concerned, only 2 cases are seen registered at Kalamassery Police Station. As far as the 5^th accused is concerned, there is no other criminal antecedents reported as per the report of the Sub Inspector of Police, Kalamassery Police Station. The allegation against the other accused are very serious. In such circumstances, according to me, accused No. 1, 2 and 4 are not entitled orders under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. But accused No. 3 and 5 can be released on bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. giving the following directions;

¶38

1. The petitioners No. 3 and 5

¶39

shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

¶40

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶41

¶42

Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioners No. 3 and 5, they shall be released on bail executing a bond for

¶43

a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;

¶44

3. The petitioners No. 3 and 5 shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners No. 3 and 5 shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the

¶45

case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶46

4. The petitioners No. 3 and 5 shall

¶47

¶48

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶49

not leave India without permission of

¶50

the Court;

¶51

5. The petitioners No. 3 and 5 shall

¶52

not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected;

¶53

6. The petitioners No. 3 and 5 shall

¶54

strictly abide by the various guidelines

¶55

issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

¶56

7. If any of the above conditions

¶57

are violated by the petitioners No. 3

¶58

and 5, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this

¶59

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶60

¶61

Court.

¶62

8. The petitioner No. 3 and 5 will

¶63

appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays till the final report is filed.

¶64

7. At this stage the learned counsel for the

¶65

petitioners submitted that, accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 will surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation.

¶66

8. Therefore, the bail application of accused Nos.

¶67

1, 2 and 4 are disposed of with following directions;

¶68

1. The petitioners Nos. 1, 2

¶69

and 4 will surrender before the

¶70

Investigating Officer within ten days from today.

¶71

2. If the petitioners Nos. 1, 2 and 4 surrender before the Investigating

¶72

Bail Appl..No.7729 OF 2020

¶73

¶74

Officer, the Investigating Officer can interrogate them. After

¶75

interrogation if the petitioners Nos.

¶76

1, 2 and 4 are arrested, they will be produced before the jurisdictional court on the same day.

¶77

3. At that stage, if any bail application is filed by the

¶78

petitioners Nos. 1, 2 and 4, after giving prior notice to the Prosecutor

¶79

concerned, the Court will consider the bail application preferably on the date of filing of the same itself.

¶80

Sd/-

¶81

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶82

JUDGE

¶83

Jms //True Copy// P.A to Judge

Prasannan T.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasannan T.K. 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

K.K.Surendran, Vs State of Kerala

Kunju Pillai, Vs State of Kerala,Rep.by Excise Inspector

Secretary Vs T.K.Unni Peravan

Zeenath P.M. Vs State of Kerala

Akheela Palanchalil Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Vs State of Kerala