Allowed

David Gishin.C.M. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jul 2023Bail Appl./2182/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of an anticipatory bail application filed by David Gishin.C.M. In a criminal case under Section 323 IPC, the court granted bail on conditions, directing surrendering within three weeks, executing a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/-, securing cooperation with investigation, and refraining from leaving India.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed bail on the execution of a bond for ₹1,00,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions including surrender within three weeks, cooperation with investigation, and prohibition on l

David Gishin.C.M. Vs State of Kerala — 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 21ST ASHADHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 2182 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.344/2023 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

DAVID GISHIN.C.M. AGED 30 YEARS S/O.MARY MANUEL, 15/1628, CHATHANATTU HOUSE, JANATHA ROAD, NAZARETH, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682002 BY ADVS. RAHUL SASI NEETHU PREM(K/241/2011) ARCHANA VINOD(K/001693/2023)

¶9

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶10

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

¶11

ADV SREEJA V - SR PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.2182/2023

: 2 :

ORDER

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2023

¶17

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶18

The petitioner is the 4^th accused in crime No.344/2023 of Mattancherry Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Section 323, 324, 326, 367, 308, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

The prosecution case is that, on 28.02.2023, the accused called the defacto complainant for a compromise talk with the person against whom the defacto complainant had certain disputes. Later, the accused persons forcefully taken the victim, in a godown at Mattancherry Marakkadavu and thereafter assaulted him, with dangerous weapons. It is also alleged that, the 1^st accused attacked him with a mirror glass on the head of the defacto complainant and tried to cause serious injury on his abdomen which was evaded by the defacto complainant causing injury on his right hand. The crime was registered in such circumstances. As the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for

¶20

B.A.No.2182/2023

¶21

: 3 :

¶22

anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶24

and Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶25

It is discernible from the records that, as per the interim order dated 05.05.2023, the petitioner was granted interim bail, subject to the condition that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for `50,000/-. It was clarified in the said order that the investigating officer is free to summon the petitioner for interrogation after issuing notice under Section 41A of Cr.P.C.

¶26

Today when the matter came up for consideration, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, on the basis of the interim order, a notice was issued to the defacto complainant and consequent to the same, the defacto complainant surrendered before the investigating officer on 27.05.2023. After interrogation, his arrest was recorded and he was released on bail in compliance of the said order. It is also reported that the investigation is in its last stage and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary.

¶27

B.A.No.2182/2023

¶28

: 4 :

¶29

The learned Public Prosecutor also pointed out that the petitioner is involved in three other cases two of which on crime is under Section 27(b) of NDPS Act and other case is under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. After considering all the relevant aspects, I am of the view that, even though specific overt acts alleged against the petitioner, since the petitioner is already arrested on the basis of the interim order passed by this Court and released on bail, I do not find any necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner. This is particularly because, in the report of the investigating officer, it is specifically mentioned that the investigation is in its last stage and custodial interrogation is not necessary.

¶30

In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of subject to the following conditions:

¶31

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

¶32

(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.

¶33

B.A.No.2182/2023

¶34

: 5 :

¶35

(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.

¶36

(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.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

(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.

¶40

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

¶41

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

ncd

B.A.No.2182/2023

: 6 :

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2182/2023

¶48

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.344/2023 OF MATTANCHERRY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

David Gishin.C.M. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

David Gishin.C.M. 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

Abhin,T.S Vs State of Kerala

Sreemesh C. Vs State of Kerala

R. Hariprasad Vs State of Kerala

Laiju Vs State of Kerala

Kuriyan John Vs State of Kerala

Raveendran Nair Vs Vinod Raj