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 3, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

C.H. Hayan vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2008

Author: K.Hema

Bench: K.Hema

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 3718 of 2008()


1. C.H. HAYAN, S/. C.K. HARIHARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. AJOSH JOSEPH, S/O. M.J. JOSEPH,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.R.VINOD

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :10/06/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                  -------------------------------------------
                        B.A.No.3718 of 2008
                  -------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 10th day of June, 2008




                                  ORDER

Petition for anticipatory bail.

2. Petitioners are the 4th and 6th accused in the crime registered under Sections 324, 452 and 34 IPC.

3. According to the prosecution, on 23.4.2008, the accused allegedly trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted him by using weapon and caused injury to him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the allegations made. They are falsely implicated in the offence with ulterior motive. He pointed out that as per the First Information Statement only three persons were involved in the assault. No other person's name or involvement is mentioned in the FI statement given by the defacto complainant. A1 to A3 were granted bail after their arrest. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had gone to the police station for taking A3 on bail. BA NO.3718/08 2 At that time, the police manhandled A3 and objections were raised by the petitioners. Offended by this, petitioners were falsely implicated in the offence.

5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. Learned public prosecutor also did not raise any objection. Hence, the following order is passed:

Respondent is directed to release the petitioners in the event of their arrest of their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.
The petition is allowed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE csl BA NO.3718/08 3