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.

Sasikumar Vs. State of Kerala

Sasikumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 27, 2014
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1135961

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
Right to Information

Case Summary

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

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sasikumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....452, 323, 324, 341, 427 and 506(i) of the indian penal code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.2. learned public prosecutor has submitted that on 22.02.2014 at about 09.00 p.m., the petitioner trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked him with a stick. furniture and other items were damaged causing loss of around rs.25,000/-. motive for the incident is that father of the de facto complainant had preferred a complaint against the petitioner. the stick is not recovered.3. learned counsel has submitted that the allegations are not true. the de facto complainant attacked the petitioner for which the police have registered crime no.141 of 2014 for various offences including sections 324 and 427 of the penal code. it is submitted that though in the fis the de facto complainant stated that the petitioner and 3 identifiable persons attacked him, now the version of the police is that only the petitioner has assaulted the de facto complainant. stick is b.a.no.2101 of 2014 2 not so far recovered.4. having regard to the relevant circumstances, i am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but subject to conditions and protecting interest of the de facto complainant also by directing deposit of a total sum of rs.20,000/- application is allowed as under: (i) petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.142 of 2014 of the santhanpara police station on 03.04.2014 at 10 a.m for interrogation. (ii) in case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply. (iii) petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (iv) in case arrest of petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (v) on such production, the petitioner shall be released on bail, (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE27H DAY OF MARCH20146TH CHAITHRA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 2101 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 142/2014 OF SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION , IDUKKI PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------- SASIKUMAR, AGED32YEARS S/O.DURAIPANDY, KOUNDARAYIL HOUSE, MUKKUDIL KARA GANDHIPPARA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT/STATE: ------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SANTHANPARA POLICE STATION THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2703-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dlk THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J --------------------------------------- B.A.No.2101 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2014 ORDER

Petitioner, as the investigation now reveals is the sole accused in Crime No.142 of 2014 of the Santhanpara Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 324, 341, 427 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that on 22.02.2014 at about 09.00 p.m., the petitioner trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked him with a stick. Furniture and other items were damaged causing loss of around Rs.25,000/-. Motive for the incident is that father of the de facto complainant had preferred a complaint against the petitioner. The stick is not recovered.

3. Learned counsel has submitted that the allegations are not true. The de facto complainant attacked the petitioner for which the Police have registered Crime No.141 of 2014 for various offences including Sections 324 and 427 of the Penal Code. It is submitted that though in the FIS the de facto complainant stated that the petitioner and 3 identifiable persons attacked him, now the version of the Police is that only the petitioner has assaulted the de facto complainant. Stick is B.A.No.2101 of 2014 2 not so far recovered.

4. Having regard to the relevant circumstances, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but subject to conditions and protecting interest of the de facto complainant also by directing deposit of a total sum of Rs.20,000/- Application is allowed as under: (i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No.142 of 2014 of the Santhanpara Police Station on 03.04.2014 at 10 a.m for interrogation. (ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply. (iii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (iv) In case arrest of petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (v) On such production, the petitioner shall be released on bail, (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 to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions: B.A.No.2101 of 2014 3 (a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. (b) Petitioner shall deposit Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand five hundred only) in a Nationalized Bank in his name for a period of two years (renewable as per order of the learned magistrate) and produce the FD receipt before the learned magistrate while executing the bail bond. (c) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case on every alternate Saturday between 10.00 a.m and 12.00 p.m for a period of two months or until filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. (d) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation. (e) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail. (f) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. (g) Petitioner shall deposit a further sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand five hundred only) in a Nationalized Bank in his name for a period of two years (renewable as per order of the learned magistrate) and produce the FD receipt before the learned magistrate within a month from the date of his B.A.No.2101 of 2014 4 release on bail. (h) In case the case is decided against the petitioner and he is made liable to pay compensation to the defacto complainat, such compensation could be realized from the amount in deposit to the extent possible. (vi) It is made clear that in case any of condition Nos. (c) to (g) is violated, it is open to the Investigating Officer or the de facto complainant to seek cancellation of the bail granted hereby by moving application before the learned magistrate as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR2006 Supreme Court 100). THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. AS

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial