Loading...

Joseph @ Jose vs Dy.S.P Crime Branch on 22 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
Joseph @ Jose vs Dy.S.P Crime Branch on 22 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5668 of 2008()


1. JOSEPH @ JOSE, S/O. JOHNY ULAHANNAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DY.S.P CRIME BRANCH,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALAE, REP. BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :22/09/2008

 O R D E R
                               K. HEMA, J.

               -------------------------------------------------
                  Bail Appl.No. 5668 of 2008
               --------------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 22nd          day of September, 2008.

                                  ORDER

Petition for bail.

2. Petitioner is the 9th accused. The offences alleged

against him are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 326, 307,

302, 124 and 120(B) of IPC. He was granted bail by this Court

and he executed bond also, before the lower court and released

on bail on 15.12.2006. He failed to appear thereafter and was

arrested on 29.3.2008 and produced before the court. On

7.4.2008, he was produced on production warrant in the case. His

bail application was rejected and he was remanded.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the police has not taken any steps to cancel the bail, though, as

per the order passed by this Court in B.A.No.7491 of 2006, the

bail granted to the petitioner is liable to be cancelled, if the

petitioner commits any offence while on bail. The court has

committed a mistake in cancelling the bail without any steps

[B.A.No.5668/08] 2

being taken for cancellation and remanding the petitioner, it is

submitted.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application

and submitted that the petitioner had absconded after his release

on bail on execution of the bond and he could be arrested only

after two years. In the the meantime, he also committed various

other offences, in breach of the condition imposed by this Court in

the bail order. There was a condition that the petitioner shall not

commit any offence while on bail and it was ordered that if the

petitioner commits breach of any of the condition, bail granted to

him shall be liable to be cancelled. Therefore, the petitioner

having committed other offences, while on bail, the court below

has rightly cancelled the bond and the petitioner was arrested on

29.3.2008 and he was produced in this case, as per production

warrant on 7.4.2008. Therefore, the order dismissing the bail

application is only sustainable, it is submitted.

5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that there is

absolutely no reason to interfere with the order passed by the

lower court. The petitioner has abused the liberty granted to

him, and he also acted in breach of the terms of the bond

[B.A.No.5668/08] 3

executed by him and he absconded for a long time. The court

below rightly rejected the bail and the arguments to the contrary

are rejected.

Petition is dismissed.

K. HEMA, JUDGE.

Krs.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information