Allowed

Varghese v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Mar 2021Bail Appl./433/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C for anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged damage to public road, the Court granted bail contingent on the deposit of the alleged loss amount and adherence to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on deposit of Rs.30,000 with investigation officer, execution of bond for Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties for like amount, and compliance with four specific conditions.

Varghese 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

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.433 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.0920/2020 OF Mannuthy Police Station, Thrissur

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

VARGHESE S/O PAILY, AGED 56 YEARS THAZHATHEKKUDIYIL, MOORKKANIKKARA PARUNCHIRIPADAM DESOM KOZHUKULLY VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MANNUTHY POLICE STATION TRISSUR 682018

¶13

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Bail Appl..No.433 OF 2021

¶16

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 1st day of March 2021

¶19

This is an application filed under Section 438

¶20

of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail.

¶21

The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.920/2020 of Mannuthy Police Station, for having

¶22

allegedly committed offence punishable under Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act.

¶23

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.11.2020 at about 2 p.m, the applicant allegedly destroyed the road which is the property of the Nadathara Grama Panchayath using JCB and Tractor

¶24

and caused a total loss of Rs.60,000/- to public

¶25

property and thus the Secretory of the Grama Panchayath filed a complaint, in consequence of which the crime was registered for the offence.

¶26

The applicant states that the allegations

¶27

are not true and there is a civil dispute

¶28

regarding the road which has to be sorted out by a

¶29

Bail Appl..No.433 OF 2021

¶30

¶31

civil court of competent jurisdiction and

¶32

therefore the allegation that he had destroyed the public property is not at all true and therefore he seeks pre-arrest bail.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant

¶34

and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶35

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that

¶36

the applicant is alleged to cause damage to the public road and irrigation canal causing a total

¶37

loss of Rs.60,000/- and therefore he is not entitled to pre-arrest bail.

¶38

After having heard the submissions on both sides, I find that the applicant is not likely to flee from justice, he is willing to co-operate with the investigation. It will have to be decided whether the property which is allegedly damaged is actually public property or not, and it is a matter which is left open to a civil court or the trial court during trial and I do not intend to

¶39

Bail Appl..No.433 OF 2021

¶40

make any comment on that particular aspect of the

¶41

dispute. However, in view of the fact that damage worth Rs.60,000/- has been caused to the public

¶42

property, the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail on deposit of the amount alleged as a loss to the public property.

¶43

In the result the application is allowed

¶44

and the applicant is directed to surrender before

¶45

the investigating officer within two weeks, and after interrogation in the event of his being

¶46

arrested, he shall be released on bail on

¶47

execution of a bond for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like

¶48

amount each to the satisfaction of the

¶49

investigating officer and on the following conditions;

¶50

He shall deposit Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty

¶51

thousand only) before the jurisdictional

¶52

court.

¶53

Bail Appl..No.433 OF 2021

¶54

2.He shall not tamper with evidence, influence

¶55

or intimidate witnesses.

¶56

3.He shall appear before the investigating

¶57

officer as and when called for.

¶58

4.He shall not get involved in similar offences

¶59

during the bail period.

¶60

In the event of violating the bail conditions,

¶61

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

court.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

SPK

Varghese v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varghese 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

Aboobacker Vs State of Kerala

Sakir P Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Shoukkath Vs State of Kerala

Subaidha Vs State of Kerala

Shijil T a Vs State of Kerala