JAYAN v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
These applications are allowed as above
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 27
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the caseand the limited duration of the judicial custody of the petitioners, I aminclined to grant bail to the petitioners but from a future date. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail witheffect…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2007 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1928 Bail Appl..No. 1483 of 2007() -----------------------------CRIME NO.80/07 OF CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ----------------- JAYAN, AGED 23. S/O.BABY, RESIDING AT CHARUVILA VEEDU, NEAR VEMPAL MUKKU, KUMMALLOOR CHERRI, ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.HARISH GOPINATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECPTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2007,ALONG WITH BA NO. 1506 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THEFOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J.````````````````````````````````````````````````````B.A. Nos.1483 and 1506 OF 2007 ````````````````````````````````````````````````````Dated this the 15th day of March, 2007
O R D E RIn B.A.No.1483/07 the 2nd accused and in B.A.No.1506/07accused Nos.1 and 3 in Crime No.80/07 of Chathannoor Police Stationfor offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324 and308 read with section 149 I.P.C. and section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959,seek their enlargement on bail. The petitioners were arrested on27.2.2007.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.
The case of the prosecution is that on 26.2.2007 at about5.30 p.m. the petitioners and others assaulted the defacto complainantand another person using a sword.
Operative part
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the caseand the limited duration of the judicial custody of the petitioners, I aminclined to grant bail to the petitioners but from a future date. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail witheffect from 20.3.07 on each of them executing a bond for Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the likeamount to the satisfaction of the Munsiff Magistrate, Paravur and subjectto the following conditions: BA.1483&1506/07: 2 :a.The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11a.m. on all Wednesdays.b. The petitioners shall make themselvesavailable for interrogation as and whenrequired by the police till the filing of the finalreport.c. The petitioners shall not influence orintimidate the prosecution witnesses norshall they attempt to tamper with theevidence for the prosecution.d.The petitioners shall not commit anyoffence while on bail. If the petitioners commit breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to them shall be liable to be cancelled. These applications are allowed as above. (V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE)aks
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: These applications are allowed as above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324; Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 15 Mar 2007. The bench was V RAMKUMAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.