Dismissed

Pradeep and Another v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Apr 2009Bail Appl./915/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam considered an application for anticipatory bail filed by two accused persons under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The court held that anticipatory bail was not permissible in such grave offences. Instead, the petitioners were directed to surrender within two weeks to seek regular bail, with the filing decision based on Sukumari.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender within two weeks to seek regular bail; anticipatory bail refused.

Pradeep and Another Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 915 of 2009() ----------------------CRIME NO. 840 OF 2008 OF EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

¶5

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 4 & 5

¶6

¶7

PRADEEP, S/O. GOPALAN, AGED 44 YEARS, PULIPARAMBIL VEEDU, PAZHUVIL WEST, THRIPRAYAR, THRISSUR DIST.

¶8

UDAYAKUMAR T.N. @ UDAYAN, S/O. NARAYANAN, AGED 29 YEARS, PUNCHAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULINCHUVADU, VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR EAST POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶16

Bail Application No. 915 of 2009

¶17

DATED: 02-04-2009

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

In this Petition filed under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioners who are accused Nos. 4 and 5 in Crime No. 840 of 2008 of East Police Station, Thrissur, for an offence punishable under Sec. 55 (a) of the Abkari Act,. seeks anticipatory Bail.

¶20

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

¶21

Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case involving such grave offence. It is too early to accept the petitioner's contention that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. There is no reason why the petitioner should not surrender before the magistrate concerned and seek regular bail. Accordingly, If the petitioner surrenders before the Magistrate concerned within two weeks from today and files an application for regular bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of preferably on the same day on which it is filed bearing in mind the decision in Sukumari v. State of Kerala - 2001 (1) KLT 22.

¶22

With the above observation this Application is disposed of .

¶23

ani/

¶24

/true copy/

¶25

ani

Pradeep and Another v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep and Another 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Mohammedali Vs State of Kerala

Sreenivasan Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Saneer @ Saneer and Another Vs the C.I.of Police Kodungallur Police Sta

C.v.Kunhippa Vs Circle Inspector of Police, Ponnani

Junid T.S. Vs State of Kerala

Ansar Muhammed Vs State of Kerala