Back
2013 Supreme(Online)(KER) 16769
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.S.GOPINATHAN, J
K.V. RAJESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./929/2013
SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM SMT.T.M.BINITHA SMT.S.JANAKI
The court upheld the right to bail under IPC provisions while imposing conditions to maintain judicial integrity.
Headnote:
Bail - IPC Offences - Sections 143, 147, 447, 353, 506(1), 149 - The court granted bail based on prior orders for similar cases, emphasizing the importance of statutory provisions and conditions for bail under the IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, accused in a criminal case, sought bail alleging false implication and fearing detention and torture. Previous orders had granted similar relief to other accused in related circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no reason to deny bail, referencing prior similar orders and establishing conditions for the granted bail, including regular reporting and evidence tampering prohibitions.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioners should be granted bail in light of their claims of false implication and the circumstances of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that prior similar orders supported the granting of bail and outlined necessary conditions to ensure compliance and integrity during the investigation.
Final Decision: The petition for bail was granted with specific conditions.
O R D E R
The petitioners are accused Nos.2,4,5,8,9,10,11,12, 15,16,17,18,19,20 and 21 in Crime No.4/2013 of Chandera Police Station for offence under Sections 143 , 147, 447, 353 and
506(1) r/w Section 149 of IPC .
2. Apprehending arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Investigating Officer, this petition is filed seeking an order directing the Investigating Officer to release the petitioners on bail, in the event of arrest with a plea that they were falsely implicated.
3. Going by Annexure A1 order dated 28.1.2013 in B.A No.393/2013, similar relief was granted to some other accused. In the above circumstance, I find no reason to decline this petition. In the result, this petition is allowed as follows:
i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 19.2.2013, who after interrogation shall produce them before the Judicial Magistrate concerned and on applications for bail moved by the petitioners, the learned Magistrate shall release the petitioners on bail on each of them executing a bond B.A No.929 of 2013 : 2:
for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Court.
ii) The learned Magistrate shall ensure the identity of the sureties and also the veracity of the tax receipts before granting bail.
Iii) The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Wednesday between 9 am to 10 am for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever event occurs first.
iv) The petitioners shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witness.
v) If any of the condition is violated, the bail granted shall stand cancelled and the Magistrate concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law.
P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge
