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.

Manoj Vs. State of Kerala

Manoj vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 21, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1166304

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
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Manoj

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....in crime no.443/2014 of changaramkulam police station, malappuram registered for the offences punishable under sections 506 and 420 read with section 34 ipc.3. the allegation against the petitioners is that they did not pay the wages of the defacto complainant who was working under them at 'lazza ice creams' thereby the defacto complainant left the job. thereafter, he was criminally intimated by the petitioners by stating that they would transform the blank signed cheque leaves of the defacto complainant which were obtained as security from b.a.no.6357 of 2014 -:2. :- him earlier and would present it before bank, and also would do away with the defacto complainant.4. heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor.5. on hearing either sides, this court is of the view that there are no sufficient materials to connect the petitioners with the offence alleged. the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the continued investigation of the case. considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this court is of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.6. in the result, this bail application is allowed and the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for `25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for b.a.no.6357 of 2014 -:3. :- the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) the petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all tuesdays and fridays commencing from 28.10.2014 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier. (ii) the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA TUESDAY, THE21T DAY OF OCTOBER201429TH ASWINA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 6357 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 443/2014 OF CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION , MALAPPURAM APPLICANTS/ACCUSED: ------------------- 1. V.C. VARGHESE, AGED42YEARS S/O.(LATE) THOMAS CHANDY M/S. SNOCAP ICE CREAMS(P) LTD, KORATTIKKARA P.O VATTAMAVU, THRISSUR PIN680543 2. HASHIM B AGED38YEARS S/O.BASHEER, LAZZA ICE CREAMS283110 PONNETH TEMPLE ROAD, KADAVANTHRA COCHIN PIN682020. BY ADVS.SRI.PRASUN.S SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) SRI.P.V.SREENIJIN SMT.K.B.SONY RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT-STATE: ----------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM PIN682031 REPRESENTING THE S.I OF POLICE CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V.S. SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2110-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

................................................................ B.A. No.6357 of 2014 ............................................................... Dated this the 21st day of October, 2014 ORDER

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.443/2014 of Changaramkulam Police Station, Malappuram registered for the offences punishable under Sections 506 and 420 read with Section 34 IPC.

3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they did not pay the wages of the defacto complainant who was working under them at 'Lazza Ice Creams' thereby the defacto complainant left the job. Thereafter, he was criminally intimated by the petitioners by stating that they would transform the blank signed cheque leaves of the defacto complainant which were obtained as security from B.A.No.6357 of 2014 -:

2. :- him earlier and would present it before Bank, and also would do away with the defacto complainant.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. On hearing either sides, this Court is of the view that there are no sufficient materials to connect the petitioners with the offence alleged. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the continued investigation of the case. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

6. In the result, this bail application is allowed and the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for `25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for B.A.No.6357 of 2014 -:

3. :- the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Tuesdays and Fridays commencing from 28.10.2014 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier. (ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer. (iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any offence while on bail. It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail. Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE ul/- [True copy] P.S. to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial