Partly allowed

Siju Thomas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jul 2023Bail Appl./2657/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 294(b), 308, 324, 341, 323, 506 IPC, the Single Judge granted interim bail conditioned on surrender within two weeks for interrogation, subject to release on bond afterwards.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners to surrender within two weeks for interrogation; thereafter, they shall be released on bail upon executing a bond of Rs 1,00,000 each with two sureties.

Siju Thomas Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | 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 3^RD DAY OF JULY 2023 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶5

CRIME NO.289 OF 2023 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION, IDUKKI

¶6

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2:

¶7

1 SIJU THOMAS AGED 41 YEARS S/O THOMAS, PUTHUMATTATHIL HOUSE, PARAPPUZHA P.O, PARAPUZHA IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685582 2 BIJU VELAYUDHAN AGED 47 YEARS S/O VELAYUDHAN VATTAKUZHIYIL HOUSE, EAST KALOOR P.O, THODUPUZHA. IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685608 BY ADV BINU PAUL

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

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

¶10

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.07.2023, THE

¶11

COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶13

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 & 2 in crime No.289/2023 of Thodupuzha Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners and the third accused are under Sections 294(b), 308, 324, 341, 323, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC.

¶16

The prosecution case is that on 24.02.2023, the first petitioner allegedly cut and removed the coconut trees standing in the compound of Family Health Centre, Kumaramangalam, which was objected to by the defacto complainant. Thereupon, the first petitioner abused and assaulted him by pointing a chopper on his head. The defacto complainant sustained injury on his left hand during the said act. The second accused also alleged to have assaulted him with a coconut log. The crime was registered in such circumstances. As the petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

¶17

Heard Sri.Binu Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. T.V. Neema, learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶18

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent of all the allegations. It is pointed out that, this Court, as per order dated 13.04.2023 in B.A.No.2369/2023 granted anticipatory bail to the third accused. According to the petitioners, the petitioners were engaged by the Kumaramangalam Grama Panchayat for cutting and removing the trees standing in the place of occurrence, which the defacto complainant obstructed, and it resulted in the said incident. It is pointed out that, in connection with the illegal obstruction of the defacto complainant, the Kumaramangalam Panchayat itself submitted complaints before the police against the defacto complainant, which is Annexure A2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

¶21

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said application by pointing out that there are allegations against the petitioners and the matter is under investigation.

¶22

I have gone through the records. Annexures A1 and A2 would, to some extent, would fortify the contentions put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is discernible that no

¶23

¶24

BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶25

serious injuries were sustained by the defacto complainant, and the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedence as well. It is also evident from the materials on record that it is not a premeditated attack, and even as per the prosecution case, the cutting and removal of the trees were obstructed by the defacto complainant. As mentioned above, Annexures A1 and A2 would reveal that, the petitioners were carrying out the cutting and removal of the trees as instructed by the Panchayath. After considering all the relevant facts and circumstances, I am of the find that, the limited custody of the petitioners for the purpose of interrogation would serve the ends of justice.

¶26

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with the following conditions:

¶27

i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting themselves to interrogation.

¶28

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

¶29

BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶30

¶31

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

¶32

iv) The petitioners 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.

¶33

v) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶34

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

¶35

vii) The petitioners 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.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

shg/

¶43

BAIL APPL. NO. 2657 OF 2023

¶44

¶45

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2657/2023

¶46

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE KUMARANALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 22.02.2023 Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED NILLS FILED BY THE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY OF THE GRAMA PANCHAYATH Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL MC NO.254/2023 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA DATED 24.03.2023

Siju Thomas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siju Thomas 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shafeeq, M Vs State of Kerala

Satheesh Babu Vs State of Kerala

Nizamudheen T. a Vs State of Kerala

Shajahan Vs the State of Kerala

Anoop K.S., Vs State of Kerala

Vinil.v.C Vs State of Kerala