Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Shiju. P.T vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2012

Author: N.K. Balakrishnan

Bench: N.K.Balakrishnan

       

  

  

 
 
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                   PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

                   FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2012/14TH VAISAKHA 1934

                                        Bail Appl..No. 2459 of 2012 ()
                                            ------------------------------
           CRIME NO.75/2012 OF KENICHIRA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DIST.
                                                 ......................

PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
----------------------------------------

             SHIJU. P.T., AGED 35 YEARS,
             S/O.THWARITHANANEDAN
             PUTHEN VEETTIL HOUSE,
             PULPALLY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SRI.N.M.JAMES.

RESPONDENT:
----------------------

             STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
             KENICHIRA POLICE STATION, WAYANAD DISTRICT,
             THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
             HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.


             BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.RAJESH VIJAYAN.


           THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
           ON 04-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
           FOLLOWING:




rs.



                 N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.
           ------------------------------------------
                   B.A. No: 2459 of 2012
           ------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 4th day of May, 2012

                         O R D E R

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No:75/2012 of Kenichira Police Station. The offences alleged against him and other accused are under sections 468, 384, 342 and 506(i) r/w 34 of IPC.

2. The learned counsel submits that there was an agreement pertaining to the petitioner's Car bearing no. KL-12/F 4943 and the entire purchase price was paid by the him to the complainant. Some amount which was due to be paid by him to the financier was to be cleared. But that was not cleared. However, as per the agreement he handed over the vehicle but he failed to transfer the R.C. Book. Thus some dispute arose. As per the F.I. Statement the agreement relied upon by the petitioner herein was brought out by coercion, intimidation etc. B.A. No: 2459/2012 -2-

3. Considering all the aspects, the following directions are issued:

The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate will, considering the nature of the case, grant bail to the petitioner but on the following conditions:
a. The accused shall execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties.
b. The accused shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and that he should B.A. No: 2459/2012 -3- appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders.

c. The accused shall produce his/their original passport before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate. d. The accused will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

e. The accused and the sureties shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate.

B.A. No: 2459/2012 -4- f. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc. N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE jjj