Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RAJESWARI versus THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RAJESWARI v. THE STATE OF KERALA - Bail Appl No. 6324 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 1432 (26 October 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 6324 of 2006()

1. RAJESWARI,
... Petitioner

2. THYAGARAJAN, S/O.K.MANI,

3. KISHORE KUMAR, S/O.RASOOL,

Vs

1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.M.JAMES

Dated :26/10/2006

O R D E R

J.M.JAMES, J.

B.A. 6324/2006

DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2006

O R D E R

The petitioners 1 to 3 are accused Nos. 1, 5 and 6 in crime No.570/2006 of Manjeri Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the first accused had introduced the second accused to the defacto complainant, as a person possessing gold bars. Accordingly, the complainant purchased 5 Kgs. of gold bars from the second accused. Later on it was found to be spurious gold. The first and second accused were arrested in connection with another case of Mannarkad police station. During the interrogation, they had confessed the committing of the offence, by selling spurious gold to the complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that except the confession statement of the second B.A.6324/2006 2 accused, there is no material against the petitioners. Accused 5 and 6 are the drivers of the first accused, who were actively involved in committing the offence, submits the prosecution.

4. Considering the facts that are placed before me, I direct the petitioners, accused 1, 5 and 6, to surrender before the Investigating Officer, who is investigating crime No. 570/2006 of Manjeri Police Station, on 3.11.2006 between 9.30 a.m and 10.00 a.m.

5. The Investigating Officer shall interrogate the petitioners and thereafter, produce them before the competent Magistrate Court, according to the law.

6. The learned Magistrate, on production of the petitioners, accused, shall hear both sides and pass appropriate orders on merit, on the date of production itself. The application is disposed of as above. J.M.JAMES

JUDGE

mrcs


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.