Kerala High Court

Bail Appl./7646/2006 of SHEELA Vs STATE OF KERALA on 29 December 2006

HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DECEMBER 2006 / 8TH POUSHA 1928 Bail Appl..No. 7646 of 2006() ----------------------------- CMP.3037/2006 of J.M.F.C.-II, CHENGANNUR Crime No.221/06 of Chengannur Excise Range ....................

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN

FRIDAY, THE 29TH DECEMBER 2006 / 8TH POUSHA 1928

Bail Appl..No. 7646 of 2006()

-----------------------------

CMP.3037/2006 of J.M.F.C.-II, CHENGANNUR

Crime No.221/06 of Chengannur Excise Range

....................

: PETITIONER/ACCUSED

------------------------------------

SHEELA, W/O. OMANAKUTTAN,

KATTILAYIL VEEDU, PERINGILIPPURAM MURI,

ENNAKKADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK.

BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPAKUMARAN NAIR

SRI.C.S.DIAS

SRI.AJITH MURALI

RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT

-------------------------

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI. JAI GEORGE

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

Page 1 of 2

ON 29/12/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE

FOLLOWING:

M.N.Krishnan, J.

========================

B.A.No.7646 of 2006========================

Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2006.ORDER

This is an application for bail in Crime No.221 of 2006 ofChengannur Excise Range. The allegation against the accused is thatshe was in possession of 1 ½ litres of arrack in a plastic bottle.

2. This application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutorand he submitted that there is another case charged against her. Thelearned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she is a person, whohad lost her son in an accident recently and her condition is pathetic.

3. After hearing both sides, I am inclined to grant bail to thepetitioner subject to the following conditions:

(1) The petitioner will be released on bail on herexecuting a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousandonly) with two solvent sureties each for the like amountto the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate –II, Chengannur.

BA 7646/06

(2) The petitioner shall not attempt to influenceor intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

This application is allowed as above.

ess 29/12

M.N. Krishnan,Judge.

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead