Allowed

Aneesh @ Ramesh .M.P., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Feb 2022Bail Appl./86/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application allowed to petitioner accused of assaulting a relative with alleged bone fracture. Court considered the family dispute nature, absence of criminal antecedents, and unnecessary need for custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; petitioner released on bail subject to executing bond for Rs. 50,000, appearing when summoned, not contacting complainant, and not interfering with investigation.

Aneesh @ Ramesh .M.P., 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 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 18TH MAGHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 86 OF 2022

¶6

CRIME NO.848/2021 OF MANNARGHAT POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

ANEESH @ RAMESH .M.P.,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. KUMARAN, MELEPURAKKAL HOUSE POMBRA, KARIMPUZHA,
PMBRA, PALAKKAD 678 595.
BY ADV M.R.SARIN

¶9

RESPONDENT/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,

¶11

ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶12

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANNARGHAT POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD 678 581.

¶13

ADV T.R. RENJITH -SR. PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

BAIL APPL. NO. 86 OF 2022 2

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail

¶18

Petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.848/2021 of Mannarghat police station, alleging commission of offences under Sections 341, 323 and 324 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

Allegation against the petitioner is that, the petitioner along with the other accused, who is none other his wife, assaulted the de facto complainant and as a result of which the de facto complainant suffered a fracture.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the de facto complainant is none other than the sister of petitioner’s mother. It is submitted that the de facto complainant is staying with yet another unmarried sister of petitioner’s mother and when the petitioner and his wife wanted to take the unmarried sister to their house, the de facto complainant had objected to the same. It is submitted that the complaint has been filed on the basis of false allegations and that the petitioner had no occasion to attack the de facto complainant. It is submitted that the 2^nd accused in the case has already been released on bail.

¶21

BAIL APPL. NO. 86 OF 2022 3

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that going by the First Information Statement and the wound certificate in respect of the de facto complainant, it is seen that she had suffered a fracture owing to the attack by the petitioner and his wife. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and he should not be granted anticipatory bail. It is submitted that that the 2^nd accused in the case had been released after arrest by granting regular bail.

¶23

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and considering the fact that the issues appear to arise out of family disputes and also considering the fact that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not be necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners subject to strict conditions.

¶24

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of arrest in crime No.848/2021 of Mannarghat police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-

¶26

BAIL APPL. NO. 86 OF 2022 4

¶27

(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶28

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.848/2021 of Mannarghat Police station as and when summoned to do so;

¶29

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No.848/2021 of Mannarghat police station;

¶30

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

¶31

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.848/2021 of Mannarghat police station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.

¶32

sd/-

¶33

GOPINATH P.

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

ajt

Aneesh @ Ramesh .M.P., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aneesh @ Ramesh .M.P., 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

Sudheesh v., Vs State of Kerala

Liju N Sarma Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs State of Kerala

P.Gopalakrishnan Alias Dileep Vs State of Kerala

Byju B.R. Vs State of Kerala

Krishnaprasad.R Vs State of Kerala