Allowed

Shiju.T v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Mar 2022Bail Appl./422/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed anticipatory bail application for three accused persons involved in a violent altercation causing serious injuries. The court directed release subject to bond, cooperation with investigation, and non-interference conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to execution of separate bonds with two solvent sureties, cooperation with investigation, and compliance with specific conduct conditions.

Shiju.T 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 422 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.899/2021 OF NILESWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD

¶7

PETITIONERS/1-3 ACCUSED:

¶8

1 SHIJU.T., AGED 36 YEARS, SON OF MANI, THATTATH HOUSE, KOYAMBURAM, KOTTAPPURAM POST OFFICE, KASARGOD, PIN - 671341

¶9

2 SHARATH.T., AGED 25 YEARS, SON OF MANI, THATTATH HOUSE, KOYAMBURAM, KOTTAPPURAM (P.O), KASARGOD, PIN - 671341

¶10

3 AJESH. K.K., AGED 36 YEARS, SON OF GOPALAN, KOTTAPURATH HOUSE, KANNAMKAI, CHERUVATHUR (P.O), KASARGODE, PIN - 671312

¶11

BY ADVS. RAHUL SASI NEETHU PREM VIVEK.P.K

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶13

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

¶14

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (SR.PP)

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

..2..

BA No.422/2022

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶22

The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 899 of 2021 of Neeleswaram Police Station, Kasaragod District, which was registered alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 324 & 326 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

¶23

The allegation against the petitioners is that they brutally attacked the de facto complainant, as a result of which, he suffered serious injuries including fracture of his nasal bone and skull.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that there are some minor disputes between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, who is stated to be a neighbour. It is further submitted that the petitioners 1 and 2 are brothers and the 3^rd petitioner is their cousin. It is submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and that they had no occasion to attack the de facto complainant in the manner suggested. It is further submitted that, at any rate, their custodial interrogation is not necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioners, with reference to Annexures A2 and A3,

¶25

BA No.422/2022

¶26

..3..

¶27

points out that two cases have been registered against the de facto complainant, one at the instance of the mother of petitioners 1 and 2 and the other at the instance of the 1^st petitioner.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes grant of bail. The injuries suffered by the de facto complainant are pointed out to show that the allegations against the petitioners are serious. It is submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail.

¶29

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners as their custodial interrogation may not be necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. I also take note of the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioners.

¶30

In the result, this application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail, in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 899 of 2021 of Neeleswaram Police Station, Kasaragod District, subject to the following conditions:

¶31

(a) Petitioners shall execute separate bonds for sums of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

¶32

..4..

¶33

BA No.422/2022

¶34

jurisdictional court.

¶35

(b) Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 899 of 2021 of Neeleswaram Police Station, Kasaragod District, at 10.00 am on 09.03.2022, 10.03.2022 and 11.03.2022, and thereafter, whenever called upon to do so;

¶36

(c) Petitioners shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant o r any witness in Crime No. 899 of 2021 of Neeleswaram Police Station, Kasaragod District;

¶37

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

¶38

If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 899 of 2021 of Neeleswaram Police Station, Kasaragod District, may file an application before the jurisdictional court, for cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

bka/02.03.2022

Shiju.T v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiju.T 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joyal John Vs State of Kerala

Dr. Kamarudheen Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Rafi M Vs State of Kerala

Primoose Antony Vs State of Kerala

Noushad P.T. Vs the State of Kerala

Sheen Vs State of Kerala