SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17172

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.T.SANKARAN, J
ISHAK – Appellant
Versus
S.I. OF POLICE, NADAKKAVU & ANOTHER – Respondent
Bail Appl./9807/2011



Advocates:
SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

Bail can be granted with conditions that ensure recovery of state losses and prevent interference with investigations in serious criminal cases.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Procedure - IPC, PDPP Act - Sections 143, 147, 148, 149 IPC; Section 3(1) PDPP Act - The court granted bail emphasizing conditions regarding financial deposit and non-interference with the case as essential legal measures in serious offenses.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, accused in a crime involving assault on police and property damage, sought bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arguing for release based on judicial custody duration and case circumstances.

Issues: Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and what conditions should apply.

Ratio Decidendi: The decision highlighted the need for a balance between the rights of the accused and the requirements for ensuring justice, particularly through financial conditions to mitigate state losses.

Final Decision: Bail granted with specific conditions including a monetary deposit and reporting requirements.

O R D E R

This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure . The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.316 of 2011 of Vellayil Police Station, Kozhikode District. The crime number was shown in the Bail Application as Crime No.316 of 2011 of Nadakkavu Police Station. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the name of the police station was shown as Nadakkavu Police Station, since in the order passed by the learned Magistrate, the name of police station was shown as Nadakkavu Police station. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the crime was registered at Vellayil Police Station.

2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 332 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act .

3. The prosecution case is that on 10.10.2011, the accused persons attacked the police personnel while they were discharging their official duties and the accused destroyed the windshield glass of the police jeep, causing a loss of `3,600/- to the State. The petitioner was arrested on 31.10.2011 in another case and his formal arrest was recorded in the present case on 3.11.2011.

4. InHemanth Kumar and others V. Sub Inspector of Police : 2011(4) KLT 288 it was held that in cases involving offences under the PDPP Act , the accused should be directed to deposit the loss sustained by the State or even more as a condition for granting bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner.

7. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rupees Twenty five thousand with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class IV, Kozhikode, subject to the following conditions:

a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of `6,000/- before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class IV, Kozhikode The petitioner shall be released on bail only on such deposit. If the petitioner is tacquitted finding that he is not guilty, he would be entitled to get refund of the amount. Otherwise, the amount would be at the disposal of the court trying the case;

b) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Thursdays, till the final report is filed or until further orders;

b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required;

c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail;

e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled.

The Bail Application is allowed as above.

(K.T.SANKARAN)

Judge ahz/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top