Sunitha Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1010267
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnJan-03-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
AppellantSunitha
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice p.bhavadasan thursday, the 3rd day of january 2013 13th pousha 193 bail appl..no. 9799 of 2012 () ------------------------------ (crime no.2696/2012 of palakkad town north police station) petitioner/accused: --------------------- sunitha, aged 2 years w/o.raju, door no 1/166.,jhothipuram anamalai, pollachi,thamilnadu by adv. sri.jacob sebastian respondent/complainant: --------------- state of kerala rep.by public prosecutor, (representing s i of police, palakkad town north police station), high court of kerala ernakulam. by public prosecutor smt.lalyza.t.y. this bail application having come up for admission on 03-01-2013, the court on the same day passed the following: p.bhavadasan, j..................................................................... b.a. no.9799 of 2012 .................................................................... dated this the 3rd day of january, 2013. order the petitioner is the accused in crime no.2696/2012 of palakkad town north police station who is alleged to have committed offence punishable under section 393 of the indian penal code.2. the allegation against the petitioner is that on 10.12.2012 she attempted to snatch a gold chain worn by the defacto complainant.3. the petitioner would say that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated with ulterior motives. at any rate, she has been in custody from 10.12.2012 and her continued custody is unnecessary. so, she prays for grant of bail.4. learned public prosecutor opposed the application and pointed out that the petitioner is from tamil nadu and if bail is granted, she will abscond.5. the claim of the petitioner that she is innocent and falsely implicated cannot be accepted in view of the cd made available before this court. the apprehension expressed by the learned public b.a. 9799/2012 2 prosecutor can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. considering the nature of the offence committed, continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary. accordingly, this application is allowed and the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:1. the petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court concerned. one of the sureties should be from local area.2. the concerned court shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, before granting bail to the petitioner.3. the petitioner shall report before the investigating officer on every monday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. until further orders.4. the petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.5. if any of the conditions is violated, the bail granted shall stand b.a. 9799/2012 3 cancelled and the court concerned on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such actions as are available to it under law. p.bhavadasan judge pms
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2013 13TH POUSHA 193 Bail Appl..No. 9799 of 2012 () ------------------------------ (CRIME NO.2696/2012 OF PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------- SUNITHA, AGED 2 YEARS W/O.RAJU, DOOR NO 1/166.,JHOTHIPURAM ANAMALAI, POLLACHI,THAMILNADU BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, (REPRESENTING S I OF POLICE, PALAKKAD TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION), HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALYZA.T.Y. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.BHAVADASAN, J.

.................................................................... B.A. No.9799 of 2012 .................................................................... Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2013. ORDER The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.2696/2012 of Palakkad Town North Police Station who is alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 393 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 10.12.2012 she attempted to snatch a gold chain worn by the defacto complainant.

3. The petitioner would say that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated with ulterior motives. At any rate, she has been in custody from 10.12.2012 and her continued custody is unnecessary. So, she prays for grant of bail.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and pointed out that the petitioner is from Tamil Nadu and if bail is granted, she will abscond.

5. The claim of the petitioner that she is innocent and falsely implicated cannot be accepted in view of the CD made available before this court. The apprehension expressed by the learned Public B.A. 9799/2012 2 Prosecutor can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. Considering the nature of the offence committed, continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

1. The petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court concerned. One of the sureties should be from local area.

2. The concerned court shall ensure the identity of the sureties and the veracity of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, before granting bail to the petitioner.

3. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. until further orders.

4. The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence and influence or try to influence the witnesses.

5. If any of the conditions is violated, the bail granted shall stand B.A. 9799/2012 3 cancelled and the court concerned on being satisfied of the said fact, may take such actions as are available to it under law. P.BHAVADASAN Judge pms