Allowed

Ravindra Kanila v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Nov 2022Bail Appl./9284/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 CrPC regarding possession of unlicensed IMFL, the Kerala High Court granted bail on bond with sureties, requiring regular appearance before the investigating officer and prohibiting witness tampering.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties for Rs. 50,000 each; weekly appearance before IO; no witness tampering.

Ravindra Kanila 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 K. BABU

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 9284 OF 2022

¶5

CRIME NO.184/2022 OF Kumbala Excise Range Office, Kasargod PETITIONER:

¶6

RAVINDRA KANILA AGED 46 YEARS SON OF NARAYANA KANILA, KANILA HOUSE, KANILA DESOM, BADAJE VILLAGE, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671323 BY ADVS. A.ARUNKUMAR HEERAKRISHNA T.H. SACHIN GEORGE ARAMBAN PRATHITHA MARIYAM THOMAS

¶7

RESPONDENT:

¶8

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV ASHI.M.C - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶9

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A No.9284/2022

O R D E R

Dated this the 18^th day of November, 2022

¶14

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of

¶15

Criminal Procedure.

¶16

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.184/2022 of Kumbala Excise Range Office, Kasaragod. The offence alleged against the petitioner is punishable under Section 58 of the Abkari Act.

¶17

The prosecution case is that on 16.11.2022 at 12.40 P.M,

¶18

the petitioner was found in possession of 2.07 litres of IMFL meant for sale in State of Karnataka.

¶19

The petitioner was arrested on 16.11.2022 and he has been in judicial custody since then.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Pubic Prosecutor.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the crime.

¶22

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioner.

¶23

B.A No.9284/2022

¶24

¶25

Considering the stage of the investigation and the nature of

¶26

allegations levelled against the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail on conditions.

¶27

In the result, this Bail Application is allowed as follows :

¶28

(a) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

¶29

(b) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 10 A.M. and 11 A.M. till the final report is filed.

Sd/-

K.BABU, JUDGE

B.A No.9284/2022

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 9284/2022

¶37

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶38

Annexure AI A TRUE COPY OF THE ARREST INTIMATION GIVEN TO LEGAL AID COUNSEL DATED 16-112022

Ravindra Kanila v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Kanila 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

Mathew T.S Vs State of Kerala

Sreehari Vs State of Kerala

T Uma IFS Vs State of Kerala

Gopi. P.K Vs State of Kerala

Akhil Prasad, Vs State of Kerala

Prashob Alaias Rokkan Vs State of Kerala