Dismissed

Amu @ Leipy @ Niyas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Mar 2008Bail Appl./1037/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the Kerala High Court dismissed a bail application filed by a 17-year-old juvenile accused of theft. The court upheld the Juvenile Justice Board's decision that bail was inappropriate but directed the Board to conclude the proceedings expeditiously by April 25, 2008.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail dismissed; directions issued to Juvenile Justice Board to complete proceedings by 25.4.2008.

Amu @ Leipy @ Niyas Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1037 of 2008(A) -----------------------------CRIME NO. 209/07 OF CHELLAKKARA POLICE STATION ....................

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

--------------------------ANU @ LEIPY @ NIYAS 17 YEARS, S/O.MADHU, KOOTHRAPPILLYPARAMBU (H) IKIA NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SANIL KUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

------------STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I.OF POLICE CHELLAKKARA POLICE STATION TRISSURE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.

¶11

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

R. BASANT, J.

¶14

Dated this the 10th day of March, 2008

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Application for regular bail. The petitioner faces allegations of having committed the offence punishable under Section 379 I.P.C. He was arrested on 23.7.2007. He is a juvenile. His application for regular bail was dismissed by the J.J. Board by a detailed order dt. 4.1.2008. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that on 5.7.2007 at about 3.30 p.m. the petitioner, who was travelling in a motor cycle, which was being ridden by a friend of his/A2 in the case, snatched the gold chain worn by the victim. The gold chain was sold away later. Investigation was completed. Final report was filed. The J.J. Board considered the question of release of the petitioner on bail, but after considering all the relevant circumstances, to which the Board has made detailed reference, came to the conclusion that if the petitioner were released on bail, he will go back into the hands of miscreants thereby jeopardising his own

¶17

B.A.No. 1037 of 2008

¶18

¶19

interest and well being. Accordingly the J.J. Board came to the conclusion that the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Report of the learned Magistrate was called for. In the report the learned Magistrate submits that the matter stands posted for trial to 14.3.2008. Altogether there are eight witnesses in the case. The Principal Magistrate has requested for time till 25.4.2008 to finally dispose of the case against the petitioner.

¶21

Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am in agreement with the conclusion of the J.J. Board that the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. However, I am satisfied that the J.J. Board can be directed to complete the proceedings against the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, prior to 25.4.2008, as undertaken by the J.J. Board. The Board shall report compliance to this Court.

¶22

This application is accordingly dismissed.

¶23

(R. BASANT) Judge

B.A.No. 1037 of 2008

R. BASANT, J.

B.A.No. 1037 of 2008

Dated this the 27th day of February, 2008

¶32

O R D E R

¶33

Heard both sides. I feel it necessary to immediately call for a

¶34

report from the J.J. Board about the stage of the proceedings in C.C. 44

¶35

of 2007. I need only mention that I expect the J.J. Board to

¶36

B.A.No. 1037 of 2008

¶37

¶38

expeditiously complete the proceedings and dispose of the same finally. The J.J. Board/Principal Magistrate must report to this Court the time that will be taken for disposal of the case by the J.J. Board. Await report of the J.J. Board. Call on 10.3.2008. The Registry shall ensure that the report is received before that date.

¶39

(R. BASANT) Judge

¶40

Amu @ Leipy @ Niyas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amu @ Leipy @ Niyas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Raju Vs State of Kerala

Manaf Vs Station House Officer

Omana Vs State of Kerala

K.B.Suresh Kumar Vs the State of Kerala

Suresh Vs D.I. of Police

Naufal P.K. @ Ikru Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Kattoor P.S.