Dismissed

Vijayan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Mar 2008Bail Appl./1232/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application by an absconding accused, Justice R. Basant held that the petitioner did not deserve anticipatory bail. The court dismissed the application as the petitioner had not surrendered, thereby failing to justify the exercise of equitable discretion under the relevant provision.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; petitioner directed to surrender to Investigating Officer or Magistrate.

Vijayan Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1232 of 2008() ----------------------------CRIME NO.9/08 OF KUTTAMPUZHA POLICE STATION

¶5

: PETITIONER/ACCUSED -----------------------------------

¶6

VIJAYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN, ELAVUNGAL HOUSE, POONJAR, RESIDING AT KAMBI LANE, 6TH MILE, MAMALAKANDOM, KUTTAMPUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH S.BRITE

¶8

RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT

¶9

¶10

STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUTTUMPUZHA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶11

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE

¶12

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

¶13

R.BASANT, J

¶14

B.A.No.1232 of 2008

¶15

Dated this the 3^rd day of March, 2008

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the 1^st accused. Altogether there are 2 accused persons. They are spouses. The petitioner is alleged to have caused death of the deceased by beating on the head of the deceased with a dangerous weapon. The alleged incident took place on 04.02.08. The wife was arrested on 05.02.08. The petitioner has not been arrested so far. He is absconding.

¶18

The petitioner prays that anticipatory bail may be granted to him. The application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor points out that the injuries were allegedly inflicted by the petitioner himself on the deceased. In any view of the matter, the petitioner does not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the one who has indulged in the overt act. The petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail, submits the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶19

B.A.No.1232 of 2008 2

¶20

Having considered all the relevant inputs, I do not find any circumstances justifying or warranting the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioner must forthwith surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail.

¶21

This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but I may hasten to observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously.

¶22

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶23

rtr/-

Vijayan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayan 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

Muhammed Hasnien @ Jadeb Vs State of Kerala

Beena Vs State of Kerala

Sajeevan Vs State of Kerala

Joseph @ Josy Vs State of Kerala

Jayaprakash Vs State of Kerala

Sabu Vs State of Kerala and Another