Allowed

Maneesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jan 2022Bail Appl./365/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of three accused persons charged with bailable offences under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code. The court granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including bail bonds with sureties, restriction on entering Alappuzha District, non-interference with witnesses, passport surrender, and prohibition of committing other crimes.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail subject to conditions including bonds with sureties, reporting to IO, and no entry into Alappuzha District.

Maneesh Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 1/2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST
CLASS -II(MOBILE),ALAPPUZHA

¶7

CRIME NO.621/2021 OF MANNANCHERY POLICE STATION

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NOS.13, 14 AND 17:

¶9

1MANEESH
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O.MOHAN DAS, MADATHILCHIRA VEEDU, CHERTHALA SOUTH
VILLAGE, CHERTHALA SOUTH PANCHAYATH WARD -13.
2SANALKUMAR
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.PRAKASAN, THATTACHIRAYIL VEEDU, ARTHUNKAL P.O.,
CHERTHALA SOUTH PANCHAYATH WARD-15.
3ANEESH
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.KESAVAN, KURUNGADATHUVALAPPIL VEEDU, KALADY P.O.,
KALADY P/W-13, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.)
P.M.RAFIQ
SRUTHY N. BHAT
M.REVIKRISHNAN
AJEESH K.SASI
MITHA SUDHINDRAN

¶10

RESPONDENT/Complainant:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA

¶12

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

SRI. SAJJU .S. (SR.PP)

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022 2

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This is an application for regular bail.

¶18

Petitioners in this bail application are stated to be accused Nos.9, 10 and 17 in Crime No.621/2021 of Mannanchery police station, Alappuzha district, alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 302, 212, 120(B) r/w. Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the array of accused has been rearranged and the petitioners are now accused Nos.13, 14 and 17 respectively.

¶20

Crime No.621/2021 of Mannanchery police station

¶21

came to be registered on account of the murder of one Shan, who is stated to be a worker of a political organization known as ‘SDPI’. The murder of the aforesaid Shan is alleged to have been carried out by accused Nos.2 to 6. In so far as the 1^st petitioner (accused No.13) is concerned, the allegation against him is that when accused Nos.2 to 6 reached the place near Pullankulam near Areeparampu in a car, the 1^st petitioner/13th accused, reached there in a motor cycle and guided the 2^nd accused who was the driver of the car to

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022 3

¶23

Kanichukulangara and after abandoning the car there, he picked up the 2^nd accused on his motor cycle and returned to Pullukulam . It is also alleged that he arranged food for accused Nos.2 to 6 and thereafter, on 19.12.2021, accused Nos.2 to 6 escaped from that place in an ambulance. Allegation against the 2^nd petitioner (accused No.14) is that, he contacted one of the main accused in the case through phone and he waited at a place called Areeparambu and guided the accused to Pullukulam and facilitated harbouring of the 1^st accused at that place. Allegation against the 3^rd petitioner (accused No.17) is that, he arranged shelter for two of the main supporters of the crime and allowed them to stay in Aluva from 19.12.2021 to 21.12.2021 and also helped one of the main accused to contact others by allowing the use of his mobile hot spot.

¶24

Sri. P Vijaya Bhanu, the learned Senior counsel appearing on the instructions of Ms. Sruthi N. Bhat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would submit that the only offence alleged against the petitioners is that under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code, which is a bailable offence. He refers to the fact that in respect of one other

¶25

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022 4

¶26

accused in this case, this Court had through order dated 13.01.2022 in Bail application No.144 of 2022 granted bail on the ground that the petitioners in that application were also persons against whom the only allegation is that of an offence under Section 212 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also submitted that going by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rasiklal V. Kishore [2009(4) SCC 446] persons accused of bailable offences have a right to be released on bail and they cannot be detained in custody, if they are ready to offer bail.

¶27

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. Learned Public Prosecutor would reiterate the arguments raised before me while I considered Bail Application No.144/2022.

¶28

After considering the fact that the petitioners in Bail Application No.144/2022 were accused only of bailable offences, taking note of the submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor, I had imposed certain conditions while granting bail. Though the learned Senior counsel is quick to point out that conditions are normally not imposed while granting bail in respect of bailable offences, considering the peculiar facts

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022 5

¶30

of the present case, I am inclined to impose the same conditions that I imposed while granting bail to the petitioners in Bail Application No.144/2022. Accordingly, this application for bail is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:-

¶31

(1) Petitioners shall execute bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

¶32

(2) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.621 of 2021 of Mannanchery Police Station, Alappuzha District, as and when called upon to do so;

¶33

(3) Petitioners shall not enter the Alappuzha District, except for the purpose of complying with any instruction issued by the investigating officer in Crime No.621 of 2021 of Mannanchery Police Station, Alappuzha District;

¶34

(4) Petitioners shall not attempt to or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.621 of 2021 of Mannanchery Police Station, Alappuzha District;

¶35

(5) Petitioners shall surrender their passport before the

¶36

BAIL APPL. NO. 365 OF 2022 6

¶37

Jurisdictional Magistrate. If they or anyone among them do not have a passport an affidavit shall be executed to that effect and filed before the said court within seven days of release on bail;

¶38

(6) Petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶39

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.621 of 2021 of Mannanchery Police Station, Alappuzha District, may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail

sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

ajt

Maneesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maneesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saidu Mohammed.a., Vs State of Kerala

Dipin Kumar R Vs State of Kerala

Shinu Shaji @ Ambadi Vs State of Kerala

Anshif Ashraf Vs State of Kerala

Abijith Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh A.P. Vs State of Kerala