Allowed

Advocate Sojan Thomas.K. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Aug 2022Bail Appl./2114/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons alleged to have committed an assault connected to a dispute over a water pump. The Court imposed standard bail conditions including bond execution and appearance before the investigating officer.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; petitioners granted anticipatory bail with conditions to execute bond, appear for interrogation, and not interfere with investigation.

Advocate Sojan Thomas.K. Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM MONDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 7TH BHADRA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶6

(Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur

¶7

District)

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2:

¶9

1ADVOCATE SOJAN THOMAS.K., AGED 47 YEARS
KADAKKARAPALLY HOUSE,LALOOR DESOM, ARANATTUKARA
VILLAGE,THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680611
NOW RESIDING AT T.M.C.50/673,
S.N. PARK ROAD, KADAKKARAPALLY HOUSE,
LALOOR DESOM, ARANATTUKARA VILLAGE,
POOTHOLE.P.O, PIN – 680004.

¶10

2ADVOCATE SANDHYA SOJAN, AGED 43 YEARS
W/O SOJAN THOMAS K,KADAKKARAPALLY HOUSE,
LALOOR DESOM, ARANATTUKARA VILLAGE,
POOTHOLE.P.O, PIN - 680004
BY ADVS.
P.M.RAFIQ
SRUTHY K K
M.REVIKRISHNAN
AJEESH K.SASI
SRUTHY N. BHAT
RAHUL SUNIL

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

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

¶13

SR.PP - SMT. SEETHA S.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶17

VIJU ABRAHAM, J

¶18

Dated this the 29th day of August, 2022

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶21

The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District, alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 323, 324 and 326 read with section 34 of the IPC.

¶22

The prosecution allegation in brief is that on 26.09.2021 at 3.30 pm the petitioners along with 3 other unidentified accused attacked the defacto complainant and his son at the petitioners’s property at S.N Park out of dispute in connection with water pump.

¶23

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

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime.

¶25

BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶26

¶27

The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that there were some disputes between the defacto complainant and the petitioners regarding the repair of the motor pumb and they attacked the defacto complainant thereby he sustained injuries.

¶28

When the matter came up for consideration on 11.03.2022, this court passed an order “not to arrest the petitioners” and the said order is still in force.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations and taking into consideration that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. In the result, this application is allowed. Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District, on 02.09.2022 at 11 am and make themselves available for interrogation on that day or any other day/s as directed by the investigating officer. It is directed that in the event of arrest of

¶30

the petitioners in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District, they shall be produced before

¶31

¶32

BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶33

the Jurisdictional Court on the same day and they shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶34

(i) The petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court,

¶35

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District, as and when called for,

¶36

(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to influence the defacto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District,

¶37

(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶38

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the

¶39

¶40

BAIL APPL. NO. 2114 OF 2022

¶41

investigating officer in Crime No. 1103/2021 of Thrissur Town West Police Station, Thrissur District, may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶42

It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioners even when the petitioners are on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663).

¶43

sd/-

¶44

VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE

¶45

R.AV

Advocate Sojan Thomas.K. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Advocate Sojan Thomas.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

Shanib P.K Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Manaf .P. v Vs State of Kerala

Sajiraj Vs State of Kerala

Athul Raj (A-2) Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh Mon. S (A-3) Vs State of Kerala

Riya Maritta Abraham Vs State of Kerala