Smith vs State of Kerala

SMITH vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 21, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1863007

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/1863007
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas
Decided On: Feb 21, 2019
Case Number: Bail Appl./1074/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SMITH

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....following:o r d e rpetitioner is the 1st accused in crime no.71/2019 of ayiroor police station, thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148 and 427 read with section 149 of ipc and section 3(2)(e) of the prevention of damage to public property act. the allegation of the prosecution is that on 17.01.2019 at about 11.00 p.m., petitioner along with the co-accused formed into an unlawful assembly and attacked the de facto complainant armed with granite stone and stick. the vehicle belonging to the police department was damaged. the damage was quantified at ₹3,000/-. crime was registered and apprehending arrest, petitioner seeks bail.2. it seems that, essentially the allegation is to be established by the oral evidence. i do not feel that a custodial interrogation is essential. hence, i am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the following conditions:(i) petitioner shall appear before theinvestigating officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of ₹30,000/- (rupees thirty only) with two sureties for the like sum each.(ii) he shall deposit a sum of ₹1,000/- (rupees one thousand only) before the jurisdictional court within 15 working days from the date of execution of the bond.(iii) he shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.(iv) he shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.(v) he shall not get involved in any other identical offence and the involvement if any, will be a ground for cancellation of bail. sd/- sunil thomas, judge pn 21/02

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 2ND PHALGUNA, 1940 AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 209/2019 of SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 02-02-2019 CRIME NO. 71/2019 OF AYIROOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: SMITH AGED 30 YEARS S/O. ARAVINDAKSHAN, KOCHUPARAYIL VEEDU, OONNINMOODU, POOTHAKULAM P.O, PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031., (REPRESENTING THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AYIROOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) PP RAMESH CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.71/2019 of Ayiroor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 427 read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 3(2)(e) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act. The allegation of the prosecution is that on 17.01.2019 at about 11.00 p.m., petitioner along with the co-accused formed into an unlawful assembly and attacked the de facto complainant armed with granite stone and stick. The vehicle belonging to the Police Department was damaged. The damage was quantified at ₹3,000/-. Crime was registered and apprehending arrest, petitioner seeks bail.

2. It seems that, essentially the allegation is to be established by the oral evidence. I do not feel that a custodial interrogation is essential. Hence, I am inclined to grant the benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed on the following conditions:

(i) Petitioner shall appear before the

Investigating Officer within 10 days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on he executing a bond for a sum of ₹30,000/- (Rupees thirty only) with two sureties for the like sum each.

(ii) He shall deposit a sum of ₹1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) before the jurisdictional court within 15 working days from the date of execution of the bond.

(iii) He shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the defacto complainant or the witnesses.

(iv) He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.

(v) He shall not get involved in any other identical offence and the involvement if any, will be a ground for cancellation of bail. Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE Pn 21/02

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2019 Same Parties SMITH vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Sunil Thomas