Allowed

Jacob Varghese, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Oct 2021Bail Appl./962/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to the first accused, Jacob Varghease, charged with offences under sections 324, 326 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, who had left India. The court noted the dispute arose from a property matter between relatives and sightings of the accused near the scene were significant. Bail is allowed subject to strict conditions regarding attendance, passport surrender,

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to conditions: appearance before IO within 15 days; release on bond if arrest proposed; appearance and passport surrender; no threat to complainant; exemption from arrest upon arr

Jacob Varghese, Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

B.A.962/2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943

¶7

BAIL APPL. NO. 962 OF 2020

¶8

CRIME NO.1272/2018 OF Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:

¶9

JACOB VARGHESE, AGED 60 YEARS KUTTIKATT CHARIVKALAYIL VEEDU, KOIPPURAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS. NIREESH MATHEW SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.

¶13

GOVERNMENT PLEADER : SMT PARVATHY KOTTOL

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.962/2020

ORDER

Petitioner herein stands arrayed as the first accused in Crime No.1272 of 2018 of Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta for offences punishable under sections 324, 326 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The allegation of the prosecution is that, on 10.12.2018 at 12 p.m., petitioner herein along with the second accused attacked the wife of the defacto complainant and when the complainant interfered, first accused hit him with a rafter. Thereafter, both the accused hit him on various parts of the body resulting in fracture of the nasal bone. Complaint was filed and crime registered. Petitioner apprehends arrest.

¶20

Petitioner originally appeared before this Court in this bail application and having considered the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and also the fact that, dispute arose out of a property dispute, and that the parties are relatives, they were referred for mediation. Mediation failed and mediation report has been received. The matter is now brought up on the ground that, petitioner who left India thereafter, is expected to return urgently. His mother is ailing and is in a sinking stage. He seeks bail.

¶21

¶22

B.A.962/2020

¶23

Adv.Lalji P. Thomas, learned counsel for the defacto complainant vehemently opposed the application. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the bail application, contending that, there is a chance of petitioner fleeing from justice and that, he is likely to co-operate with the investigation.

¶24

It seems that the place of incident is near the house of the accused. The address of the parties in Ext.P3 shows that, both the parties reside within the jurisdiction of two different post offices. Clearly, the incident happened near the house of the petitioner, which is at a distant place from that of the residence of the defacto complainant. Defacto complainant has no explanation as to why he went there. It seems that the investigation has considerably progressed.

¶25

Having considered the entire facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

¶26

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigation Officer within 15 days from today. After interrogation, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.60,000/(Rupees sixty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶27

(ii) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and surrender his passport within 15 days.

¶28

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate

¶29

B.A.962/2020

¶30

¶31

the de facto complainant and the witnesses nor shall he interfere in the process of investigation. (iv) In the light of the fact that a blue corner notice has been issued as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, petitioner shall not be arrested on his arrival in India.

¶32

Bail application is allowed as above.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

Sbna/

Jacob Varghese, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jacob 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

Rajendra Prasad Vs Kerala Forest Development Corporation Ltd.

Ashok Augustine, Vs Kerala State Electricity Board Limited- Kseb

Ouseph M.E Vs Kerala Water Authority

Akhil Das a Vs State of Kerala

Asha Jose Vs State of Kerala

Udayakumar K. Vs Union of India