Allowed

Saneesh K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC30 Mar 2021Bail Appl./1727/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court held custodial interrogation was not necessary as no specific overt act was attributed to the applicant and severe injuries were not sustained, despite his criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; directed to surrender within two weeks; bail on Rs.50,000 bond with conditions.

Saneesh K Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1943

¶5

Bail Appl.No.1727 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.661/2020 OF Dharmadam Police Station , Kannur

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

SANEESH K., AGED 36 YEARS, SAROVARAM,DHARMADAM,PALYAD DESOM, KANNUR – 670661.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI SRI.RAMEEZ NOOH

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

R1 BY SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Bail Appl.No.1727 OF 2021

¶16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Dated this the 30th day of March 2021

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail under

¶20

Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶21

The applicant is the 5th accused in Crime

¶22

No.661/2020 of Dharmadam Police Station for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324 and 308 read with

¶23

Section 149 of the I.P.C.

¶24

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on

¶25

16.12.2020 at about 4.45 PM, the applicant and the rest

¶26

of the accused formed an unlawful assembly, committed

¶27

riot armed with deadly weapons like iron pipes and

¶28

wooden sticks and in prosecution of the common object

¶29

of the said unlawful assembly, they wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and assaulted him with the knowledge that the assault could prove fatal

¶30

and thus attempted to commit culpable homicide.

¶31

¶32

Bail Appl.No.1727 OF 2021

¶33

The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are not true and that due to political reasons he has been implicated as an accused. It is also stated that there is also no specific overt act attributed to him and he was not wielding any weapon and the accused who have been arrested were already enlarged on bail, and therefore, there is no necessity for custodial interrogation of the applicant and hence he may be released on bail.

¶34

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

¶35

The learned Public Prosecutor points out that

¶36

the applicant has criminal antecedents and that he was earlier involved in offences punishable under Sections 326 and 307 of the I.P.C. in the year 2017. But

¶37

subsequent to that he was not involved in any other crime. The prosecution case indicates that the

¶38

applicant was not wielding any weapon. The injuries sustained are not very serious or grave. Under the circumstances, I find that custodial interrogation of

¶39

¶40

Bail Appl.No.1727 OF 2021

¶41

the applicant may not be required for the purpose of investigation.

¶42

In the result, the bail application is allowed and

¶43

the applicant is directed to surrender before the

¶44

investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of

¶45

arrest, after interrogation, the applicant shall be

¶46

released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two

¶47

solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the

¶48

satisfaction of the investigating officer, and on the following conditions:

¶49

(i) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

¶50

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays between 9.00 AM and 12.00 noon for a period of two months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier; and

¶51

(iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any similar offences.

¶52

Bail Appl.No.1727 OF 2021

¶53

¶54

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional

court.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

dkr

Saneesh K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saneesh 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

N.V. George Vs State of Kerala

Sajeev Karun Vs State of Kerala

Rasheed Vs State of Kerala

Suhas Vs State of Kerala

Shambhu Vs State of Kerala

Rino Thomas Vs State of Kerala