The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner after directing his surrender within two weeks. Bail was conditioned on executing a bond and adhering to specific restrictions during the bail period.
Direction to surrender within two weeks; release on bail upon arrest with Rs. 50,000 bond and two sureties subject to conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942
Bail Appl..No.704 OF 2021
CRIME NO.3461/2020 OF Pathanamthitta Police Station, Pathanamthitta
PETITIONER/S:
SATHEESH A.G AGED 45 YEARS SON OF GOPINATHAPILLA, ACKLATHU HOUSE, PRAMADOM, MALLASSERY P.O PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689646
BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH K.SASI
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.V.SREEJA -PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.704 OF 2021
2
ORDER
Dated this the 19th day of February 2021
This is an application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail.
The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.3461/2020 of Pathanamthitta Police Station, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 427, 447, 506(ii) of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act.
applicant in between 16.10.2020 and 25.10.2020, allegedly send a voice message to the de facto complainant threatening to shot him down by hiring
goondas and that subsequently on 25.10.2020, someone allegedly trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and committed mischief by destroying his car, there was a bullet mark on the backside of the car and a bullet was allegedly recovered from inside the car. The de facto
Bail Appl..No.704 OF 2021
3
complainant assumed that it was an act in
consequence of the threat caused by the applicant and therefore the crime was registered. It is stated that there was a dispute between the applicant and the de facto complainant who are relatives, in connection with the management of the school, which they had inherited. The applicant had therefore caused threat to the de facto complainant since he wanted to assert the
powers of the management of the school in exclusion to the de facto complainant.
and the allegations are not true and the
allegation of threat is also not true and that there is no possibility of hiring anyone who has committed trespass and used the fire arms as alleged.
and the learned Public Prosecutor.
Bail Appl..No.704 OF 2021
4
the only incriminating material against the applicant at present is that he had allegedly send a message from his mobile phone to the de facto complainant and further someone had trespassed the property of the de facto complainant and shot at the car, in consequence of which the bullet was also recovered. There is no material collected by the investigating officer to the effect that the firearm belonged to the applicant or that the applicant had used the firearm. Even if he had engaged someone else to use the firearm, an offence under Section 109 for abetment to had been included, but there is no such offence included in the FIR. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents also is a fact admitted by the learned Public Prosecutor.
interrogation of the applicant. The applicant is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of his
Bail Appl..No.704 OF 2021
5
arrest, after interrogation and recovery if any,
he shall be released on bail on execution of a
bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the investigating officer
and on the following conditions;
In the event of violating the bail conditions,
the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional court.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON
JUDGE
SPK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C is maintainable given the prosecution case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satheesh A.G
State of Kerala
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
