Allowed

Santhosh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Mar 2022Bail Appl./575/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner, 1st accused in an offence under IPC Sections 294(b), 326 read with 34. Conditions included bond execution, reporting to IO, and not interfering with investigation or influencing witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in the event of arrest subject to execution of bond, reporting to IO, and not interfering with investigation.

Santhosh Kumar 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 16^TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 575 OF 2022

¶6

Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station

¶7

PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:

¶8

SANTHOSH KUMAR

¶9

AGED 39 YEARS

¶10

S/O GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, "MAZHAVILLU", MUKHATHALA, THRIKKOVIL VATTOM, KOLLAM CITY, KOLLAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, PIN - 691577

¶11

BY ADV NIHARIKA HEMA RAJ

¶12

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶13

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

¶14

2 CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI AGED 63 YEARS PALLIKKUDAM VILA VEEDU, NEAR MUKHATHALA GOVERNMENT L.P. SCHOOL, MUKHATHALA P.O., KURAMANNACHERY, THRIKKOVIL VATTAM, KOLLAM CITY, KOLLAM, PIN - 691577

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

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

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A. No.575/2022

-2-

O R D E R

The petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam District alleging commission of offences under Sections 294 (b), 326 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

The allegation against the petitioner is that on 25-11-2021 at 5.30 p.m the petitioner along with the other accused used abusive language and attacked the de facto complainant with a stick, injuring him. It is alleged that the 2^nd accused in the case used offensive language against the wife of the de facto complainant.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are neighbours. It is submitted that the petitioner and his father who is a 2^nd accused in the case had objected to burning of plastic waste in the compound of the de facto complainant. A wordy altercation took place. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted Annexure-B complaint before the Kottiyam Police Station as evidenced by Annexure-C acknowledgment. It is submitted that thereafter both the parties were called to the police station and the matter was mediated and settled as seen from Annexure-D. It is submitted that more than a month later the de facto complainant filed the complaint which led to registration of the above crime making false and baseless allegations against the petitioner and the other accused.

¶24

B.A. No.575/2022

¶25

-3-

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor points of the circumstances of the case appearing from the records. It is submitted that going by the First Information Statement of the de facto complainant, the offences alleged against the petitioner have been committed. It is submitted that following investigation a final report has already been filed in the matter.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations and being convinced that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary as a final report has already been filed, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions. I also note that no criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioner.

¶28

In the result, this bail application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in connection with Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶29

(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶30

(ii) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating officer in Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station as and when called upon to do so;

¶31

(iii) Petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in

¶32

B.A. No.575/2022

¶33

-4-

¶34

Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station;

¶35

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

¶36

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer

¶37

in Crime No.755/2021 of Kottiyam Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.

¶38

Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶39

AMG

¶40

B.A. No.575/2022 -5-

¶41

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 575/2022

¶42

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶43

Annexure A TRUE COPY OF FIR DATED 12.12.2021 IN CRIME NO. 0755/2021 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM Annexure B TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 26.11.2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM Annexure C TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT SLIP DATED 26.11.2021 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

Santhosh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh Kumar 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

M.S.Sumesh Vs State of Kerala

Shahana @ Sana, Vs the State of Kerala

Vishal Babu Vs State of Kerala

Ambika Vs State of Kerala

Praveen Haridas Vs State of Kerala

Brikesh .a Vs State of Kerala