Sinto vs State of Kerala

SINTO vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 23, 2020

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1780942

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/1780942
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Jul 23, 2020
Case Number: Bail Appl./4308/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SINTO

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....committed offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 324, 506(ii) and 308 r/w section 34 of the ipc.3. the prosecution case in brief is that,the accused persons are working as security staff in paliakkara toll plaza. on 05.05.2020, the defacto complainant and some others were protesting at the toll plaza and the accused persons in furtherance of common intention removed him by force and also assaulted him after wrongfully restraining him. he sustained an injury as a result of being hit with a walkie talkie on his head by the accused persons, and three stitches had to be put on the wound.4. the applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are false and frivolous. he does not have any criminal antecedents and he may be released on anticipatory bail.5. heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned public prosecutor.6. admittedly the applicant does not haveany criminal antecedents. he was also not wielding any dangerous weapon. what he had in his hand was only a walkie talkie, which was allegedly used to assault the defacto complaint. he has also not sustained any grievous injury. there is no possibility of the applicant absconding. hence, i am inclined to grant the pre-arrest bail as sought for.7. in the result, the application isallowed, and the applicant is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks, and after interrogation in the event of his being arrested and recoverybeing made, he shall be released on bail on execution of bond for rs.50,000/-(rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and on the following conditions; i. he shall not tamper with evidence, influence or intimidate witnesses. ii. he shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for. iii. he shall not get involved in similar offences during the bail period. in the event of violating the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2020 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1942 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 376/2020 DATED 02-06-2020 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR CRIME NO.679/2020 OF Pudukkad Police Station , Thrissur PETITIONER/S: SINTO AGED 23 YEARS S/O ANTU, MOYALAN HOUSE, CHENGALOOR DESOM P.O.CHENGALOOR, THRISSUR, PIN-680 312. BY ADV. SRI.ARUL MURALIDHARAN
RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 23rd day of July 2020 This is an application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Applicant is the second accused in

Crime No.679/2020 of Puthukkad Police Station, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506(ii) and 308 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that,

the accused persons are working as Security staff in Paliakkara toll plaza. On 05.05.2020, the defacto complainant and some others were protesting at the toll plaza and the accused persons in furtherance of common intention removed him by force and also assaulted him after wrongfully restraining him. He sustained an injury as a result of being hit with a walkie talkie on his head by the accused persons, and three stitches had to be put on the wound.

4. The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are false and frivolous. He does not have any criminal antecedents and he may be released on anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. Admittedly the applicant does not have

any criminal antecedents. He was also not wielding any dangerous weapon. What he had in his hand was only a walkie talkie, which was allegedly used to assault the defacto complaint. He has also not sustained any grievous injury. There is no possibility of the applicant absconding. Hence, I am inclined to grant the pre-arrest bail as sought for.

7. In the result, the application is

allowed, and the applicant is directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks, and after interrogation in the event of his being arrested and recovery

being made, he shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and on the following conditions; i. He shall not tamper with evidence, influence or intimidate witnesses. ii. He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for. iii. He shall not get involved in similar offences during the bail period. In the event of violating the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional Court.

Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE sn

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties SINTO vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon