Allowed

Arun S v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Jul 2023Bail Appl./1537/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court grants anticipatory bail to petitioner, directing surrender for interrogation, execution of bond with sureties, cooperation with investigation, and adherence to other standard conditions including non-contact with witnesses and not leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within three weeks, execution of bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, cooperation in investigation, weekly appearances, and other standard conditions.

Arun S Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Public… — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 1537 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.1812/2022 OF ERAVIPPURAM POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

ARUN S AGED 27 YEARS S/O STEPHEN EDAKKUNNAM LAKSHAM VEEDU, VADAKKUMBHAGAM, ERAVIPUAM PO KOLLAM (DIST)-, PIN - 691011 BY ADV M.RAJESH

¶9

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION ERAVIPURAM PO KOLLAM (DIST), PIN - 691011

¶11

ADV.S.S HRITWIK SR.GP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.1537/2023

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2023

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶18

The petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime

¶19

No.1812/2022 of Eravipuram Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 427, 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Even though while registering the crime, the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code was incorporated, subsequently the same was deleted.

¶20

The prosecution case is that, on 24.12.2022 at 11.55 p.m., when the defacto complainant and his friend was going to Eravipuram Church and when they reached near Vallakkadavu Tsunami Flat, the petitioner along with the other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted with an iron rod and a stone. It is alleged that the 1^st accused attacked the defacto complainant with an iron rod on his head, which was

¶21

B.A.No.1537/2023

¶22

: 3 :

¶23

evaded by the defacto complainant, thereupon he caused injury on his left hand. The 2^nd accused assaulted the defacto complainant with a stone and the 3^rd accused inflicted injuries on his left hand with a beer bottle. The other accused was also manhandled. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶24

Heard Sri. M. Rajesh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C.S. Hritwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶25

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent in all the allegations.

¶26

On the other hand the learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said application.

¶27

From the perusal of the records, it is seen that there are certain overt acts alleged against the petitioner. But it is evident that, no serious injuries were sustained by the defacto complainant. The only non bailable offence alleged is under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner does not

¶28

B.A.No.1537/2023

¶29

: 4 :

¶30

have any criminal antecedents and relevant aspects, taking into consideration, I am of the view that, the interest of justice would be served, if the cooperation of the petitioner in the investigation is ensured. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner in this case.

¶31

In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:

¶32

(i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of three weeks from today, for subjecting himself to interrogation.

¶33

(ii) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer.

¶34

(iii) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

¶35

(iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until the filing of the final report.

¶36

(v) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶37

B.A.No.1537/2023

¶38

: 5 :

¶39

(vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

¶40

(vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

¶41

(viii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶42

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶43

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the

¶44

application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶45

Sd/ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

B.A.No.1537/2023

: 6 :

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1537/2023

¶50

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1812/2022 OF ERAVIPPURAM POLICE STATION Annexure2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDERS OF THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLLAM DATED 25.01.2023 IN CRL MC NO. 158/2023

Arun S v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun S v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor High Court 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

Abdul Sakeer.B.S Vs State of Kerala

Vineeth Vs State of Kerala

Ashraf K.S Vs State of Kerala

Xavier Kennedy @ Joy Vs State of Kerala

Sarath Reveendran Vs State of Kerala

Bipin Kumar Tiwari Vs State of Kerala