Suraj @ Chanchal Vs. State of Kerala

Suraj @ Chanchal vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 08, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1012103

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1012103
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan
Decided On: Jan 08, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suraj @ Chanchal

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....is the sole accused in crime no.985/2012 of kunnathunadu police station for having committed offence punishable under sections 452, 341, 324, 354, 294(b) and 506(i) of ipc.2. the allegation against the petitioner is that on 28.11.2012 at about 8.45 pm the petitioner had trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, abused her and caused injuries to her.3. the petitioner would say that he is totally innocent and has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive. the petitioner would say that he has not committed any act, which constitute an offence.4. after having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned public prosecutor and after having perused the records, it is felt that this is a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction needs to be exercised in favour of the b.a no.9785 of 2012 :2. petitioner. accordingly the petition is allowed as follows: i) the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on or before 16.1.2013, who after interrogation shall produce him before the jfcm concerned and on an application for bail moved by the petitioner, the learned magistrate shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond 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 petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer concerned for interrogation as and when required by him until further orders. iv) the petitioner 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 jfcm concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law. p.bhavadasan judge ab

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 18TH POUSHA 193 Bail Appl..No. 9785 of 2012 () ------------------------------ (CRIME NO. 985/2012 OF KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) APPLICANT/ACCUSED : -------------------------------- SURAJ @ CHANCHAL, AGED 3 YEARS S/O.RAVINDRAN,KURUPPAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,KARUMALOOR NORTH PARAVUR,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-683511. BY ADVS.SRI.PRASUN.S SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT-STATE : ------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM PIN-682031.REPRESENTING THE S.I.OF POLICE KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BP. P.BHAVADASAN, J ----------------------------------------- B.A No.9785 of 2012 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2013 ORDER

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.985/2012 of Kunnathunadu Police Station for having committed offence punishable under Sections 452, 341, 324, 354, 294(b) and 506(i) of IPC.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 28.11.2012 at about 8.45 pm the petitioner had trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, abused her and caused injuries to her.

3. The petitioner would say that he is totally innocent and has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive. The petitioner would say that he has not committed any act, which constitute an offence.

4. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Public Prosecutor and after having perused the records, it is felt that this is a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction needs to be exercised in favour of the B.A No.9785 of 2012 :

2. petitioner. Accordingly the petition is allowed as follows: i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 16.1.2013, who after interrogation shall produce him before the JFCM concerned and on an application for bail moved by the petitioner, the learned Magistrate shall release the petitioner on bail on his executing a bond 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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer concerned for interrogation as and when required by him until further orders. iv) The petitioner 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 JFCM concerned, on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such proceedings as are available to him in law. P.BHAVADASAN Judge ab

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Suraj @ Chanchal vs State of Kerala Same Subject Education Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan