Allowed

Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2021Bail Appl./1497/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Kerala allowed the release of the first accused on regular bail. The applicant had been in remand custody for over a month after an attack involving a spanner causing fractures. Considering that recovery was complete and no further detention served a purpose, the court granted bail subject to stringent conditions including appearance before an officer.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for like amount each, with condition to appear before an officer on Saturdays.

Anil Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.1497 OF 2021

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 203/2021 DATED 03-02-2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,PALAKKAD

¶7

CRIME NO.570/2020 OF Kottayi Police Station, Palakkad

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

ANIL KUMAR AGED 48 YEARS SON OF KRISHNAN, PULIMANNINGAL VEDDU, KOTTAYI, PALAKKAD. 678572

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031

¶13

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Bail Appl..No.1497 OF 2021

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 15th day of March 2021

¶19

Application for regular bail under Section 439

¶20

Cr.P.C.

¶21

The applicant is the first accused in Crime

¶22

No.570/2020 of Kottayi Police Station for having

¶23

allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326 and 308 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

¶24

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on

¶25

26.12.2020 at about 9 p.m, the applicant in

¶26

furtherance of common intention with the co-

¶27

accused, attacked the de facto complainant after

¶28

wrongfully restraining him, while he was

¶29

proceeding to his house and thereafter attacked him with dangerous weapon like a spanner causing a

¶30

fracture of his frontal bone which could have even

¶31

caused his death about which the applicant had knowledge while assaulting. Hence, attempted to

¶32

Bail Appl..No.1497 OF 2021

¶33

¶34

commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. He had approached this Court for anticipatory bail and the application was disposed of with a direction to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. Accordingly, he surrendered on 03.02.2021 and was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. He continues in remand. The applicant submits that the recovery is already completed and therefore no purpose would be served by further detaining him in custody. Hence seeks bail.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶36

The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the weapon allegedly used by the applicant has already been recovered. He has been in custody from 03.02.2021. The learned Prosecutor points out that the applicant has three criminal cases against him and in one of those cases he was

¶37

Bail Appl..No.1497 OF 2021

¶38

¶39

committed for an offence punishable under Section

¶40

326 IPC and therefore being a person with antecedents in case the applicant is released on bail, there is every possibility of his repeating offences of similar nature.

¶41

After having heard the submissions on both

¶42

sides, I find that the conviction of the applicant was in the year 2005 and thereafter he has not been involved in offences of grave nature. The recovery is already completed and the applicant has been in custody for more than a month. Therefore, I find no purpose for further detention of the applicant. But considering his criminal antecedents and conviction, stringent conditions can be imposed.

¶43

In the result, the bail application is

¶44

allowed and the applicant is directed to be

¶45

released on bail on execution of bond for

¶46

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two

¶47

Bail Appl..No.1497 OF 2021

¶48

solvent sureties for the like amount each to the

¶49

satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on

¶50

the following conditions;

¶51

officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m and 12 noon for a period of two months or till filing

¶52

of the final report whichever is earlier.

¶53

intimidate the witnesses.

¶54

offences during the currency of the bail.

¶55

In the event of violating the bail conditions,

¶56

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

court.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

SPK

Anil Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil 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

Nidheesh C.R. Vs State of Kerala

Vipin Das Vs State of Kerala

P.M. Muhammed Subair Vs State of Kerala

Nabeel Vs State of Kerala

Adon Vincent Vs State of Kerala

Remani Vs State of Kerala