Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shine Vs. State of Kerala

Shine vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 12, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1101161

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shine

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....sec.394 of the indian penal code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.2. learned public prosecutor, while opposing the application has submitted that on 24.10.2013 at about 4 p.m., the petitioner and accused nos.1 and 2 chased the defacto complainant who was riding a motor cycle, restrained and wanted him to take one of the accused on his motor cycle. when that was refused, the 2nd accused snatched rs.510/- (rupees five hundred and ten only) from the pocket of the defacto complainant and assaulted him.3. learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. it is submitted that at any rate no overt act is attributed to the petitioner.4. having regard to the alleged role of the petitioner, i am inclined to think that his custodial interrogation is not required. hence, i am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner. bail appl. no.8280 of 2013 2 resultantly, the application is allowed as under.1. petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.758 of 2013 of the poovar police station on 18.12.2013 at 10.00 am for interrogation.2. in case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply.3. in case after interrogation arrest of the petitioner is recorded, he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each before the arresting officer and subject to the following conditions: a) petitioner shall report to the officer investigating crime no.758 of 2013 of the poovar police station on every alternate saturday between 10.00 am and 12.00 pm for a period of two months bail appl. no.8280 of 2013 3 or until filing of the final report whichever is earlier. b) petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE12H DAY OF DECEMBER201321ST AGRAHAYANA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 8280 of 2013 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 758/2013 OF POOVAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ....... PETITIONER/3RDACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ SHINE, S/O.SIMON, AGED23YEARS, THUNDU KANJIRAMNINNA VEEDU, PAZHAYAKADA, THIRUPURAM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.SREEJITH. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1212-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.

-------------------------------- Bail Appl. No.8280 of 2013 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of December 2013 ORDER

Petitioner is the 3rd accused, in Crime No.758 of 2013 of the Poovar Police station for the offence punishable under Sec.394 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor, while opposing the application has submitted that on 24.10.2013 at about 4 p.m., the petitioner and accused nos.1 and 2 chased the defacto complainant who was riding a motor cycle, restrained and wanted him to take one of the accused on his motor cycle. When that was refused, the 2nd accused snatched Rs.510/- (Rupees five hundred and ten only) from the pocket of the defacto complainant and assaulted him.

3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. It is submitted that at any rate no overt act is attributed to the petitioner.

4. Having regard to the alleged role of the petitioner, I am inclined to think that his custodial interrogation is not required. Hence, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner. Bail Appl. No.8280 of 2013 2 Resultantly, the application is allowed as under.

1. Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.758 of 2013 of the Poovar Police station on 18.12.2013 at 10.00 am for interrogation.

2. In case interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, it is open to the investigating officer to direct presence of the petitioner on any other day/days and time which the petitioner shall comply.

3. In case after interrogation arrest of the petitioner is recorded, he shall be released on bail by the arresting officer (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each before the arresting officer and subject to the following conditions: a) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating Crime No.758 of 2013 of the Poovar Police station on every alternate Saturday between 10.00 am and 12.00 pm for a period of two months Bail Appl. No.8280 of 2013 3 or until filing of the final report whichever is earlier. b) Petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for interrogation. c) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. d) Petitioner shall not get involved any offence during the period of this bail. e) Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the witnesses. f) In case any of the above conditions is violated, it is open to the investigating officer to file application before the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail granted hereby, as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC100. Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial