Shyamlal v. Sho Mayyil Police Station

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/17TH MAGHA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 594 of 2015 (D) ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 21/2015 OF MAYYIL POLICE STATION , KANNUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

-------------------------------------- SHYAMLAL, AGED 20 YEARS S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, ASHARIKKANDY PUTHIYAVEEDU, MATHODAM KANNADIPARAMBA, KANNUR - 670604.

BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.ASHIS RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

---------------------------------------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MAYYIL POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.SREEJITH V.S.

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

B.KEMAL PASHA, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No.594 of 2015 D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of February 2015

ORDER

Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2.

Petitioner is the 5th accused in Crime No.21/2015 of Mayyil police station, Kannur district registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 332, 353 and 506(i) read with Section 149 of the I.P. C.

3.

The allegation against the petitioner and the other accused is that on 6.1.2015 at 11.15 p.m., while the de-facto complainant Police Officer along with other Police Officers, were taking some persons, who had staged a tumult under the influence of liquor, at the festival ground at Valluvankadavu Sree Muthappan Temple, they were obstructed by the petitioner and other accused and the police party were pelted with stones, thereby they got

B.A.594/2015 injured and they were deterred from the discharge of their official duties.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor.

5. No criminal antecedents have been reported against the petitioner. No specific overt act has been alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is a boy of 20 years of age. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case wherein anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner, especially when no criminal antecedents have been reported against him.

6.

In the result, this bail application is allowed and the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioner, is directed to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer

B.A.594/2015 conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Fridays and Tuesdays, commencing from 13.2.2015 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier.

(ii) The petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

(iii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer.

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any offence while on bail.

It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail. Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE dl // TRUE COPY // PA to Judge