Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LOKESH TIWARI @ ARIYAN MITHAL AGED 32 versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LOKESH TIWARI @ ARIYAN MITHAL AGED 32 v. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE - Bail Appl No. 5503 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 718 (12 September 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5503 of 2006()

1. LOKESH TIWARI @ ARIYAN MITHAL AGED 32
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent

2. MADHUSOODANAN. AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.

For Petitioner :SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

Dated :12/09/2006

O R D E R

J.M.JAMES, J.

B.A. 5503/2006

DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2006

O R D E R

The petitioner is the second accused, in crime No.193/2006 of Aluva Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The learned Magistrate of Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Aluva, had refused to grant bail on the grounds, inter alia, that the presence of the petitioner during the trial, was doubtful and also that the final report had already been filed. Therefore, the trial could be completed at the earliest.

2. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had filed Crl.M.C.No.2391/2006 for quashing the final report, filed in Crime No.193/2006 and an interim stay was ordered in Crl.M.A.No.4379/2006 on 10.8.2006. The same had already been extended until further orders. The counsel also submitted that the father of the petitioner is working in Bhilai Steel plant and the B.A.5503/2006 2 petitioner would be available for trial or before the Investigating Officer, as and when required, and therefore, prayed for bail.

3. After hearing both sides and considering the facts on record, I grant bail and release the petitioner from jail, subject to the following conditions:-

(a). The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/-, with two solvent sureties, each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Aluva.

(b). The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala, till the final trial and disposal of the case, unless otherwise ordered by the competent Court of law.

(c). The learned Magistrate while granting bail shall ensure that at least one of the sureties produces the solvency certificate, for the above amount to the satisfaction of that Court, and if the Magistrate is doubtful of any document B.A.5503/2006 3 produced before him, he is at liberty to conduct the enquiry. But the same should not be allowed to protract the granting of the bail to the petitioner. The application is allowed 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.