Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.VINODKUMAR versus STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.VINODKUMAR v. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY - Bail Appl No. 3143 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 8755 (28 May 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 3143 of 2007()

1. P.VINODKUMAR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.C.S.MANU

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

Dated :28/05/2007

O R D E R

V. RAMKUMAR, J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bail Application NO.3143/2007
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

DATED: 28-5-2007

O R D E R

In this Petition filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is accused No.5 in Crime No. 130/2007 of Kottakkal Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 362 and 395 of IPC seeks his enlargement on bail. Petitioner was arrested on 16.4.2007.

2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. Having regard to the nature of the offences, the duration of judicial custody of the petitioner and the other circumstances of the case etc., I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the J.F.C.M, Malappuram and subject to the following conditions: B.A.3143/2007 -2-

(a). The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.

(b). The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the police till the filing of the final report.

(c) The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution.

(d). The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. If the petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled. This application is allowed as above.

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

CSS/ css/ In this Petition filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.R. No.8/2007 of Sulthan Bathery Excise Range for an offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act for having been found in possession of 3 liters of illicit arrack, seeks his enlargement on bail. Petitioner was arrested on 6.2.2007.

2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. Having regard to the nature of the offence and the other circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, but only from a future date. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail with effect from 6.3.2007, on his executing a bond for Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the J.F.C.M.-I, Sulthan Bathery, and subject to the following conditions:


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.