Dismissed

Akhil R.Ratheesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Nov 2011Bail Appl./7825/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application. Despite allegations that the petitioner was the victim, the serious nature of the offences led the Court to deny bail, prioritizing investigation. It granted only an interim protection from arrest for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Dismissed the bail application but granted an interim direction not to arrest the petitioner for two weeks.

Akhil R.Ratheesh Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 7825 of 2011()

¶6

¶7

Crime No.499 of 2011 of Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District.

¶8

PETITIONER: --------------------

¶9

AKHIL R, RATHEESH, AGED 19 YEARS S/O.RATHEESH KUMAR, R.R.BHAVAN PACHUKAUD, ARIYA DESOM, KARODE VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 502.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE SMT.B.BINDU SMT.N.DEEPA

¶11

RESPONDENT:

¶12

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE POZHIYOOR POLICE STATION.

¶14

BY P.P.SRI.K.K.RAJEEV

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶17

--------------------------------B.A.No.7825 OF 2011

¶18

Dated this the 22^nd day of November, 2011

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.499 of 2011 of Pozhiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District.

¶21

The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

The prosecution case is that on 3.9.2011, at about 8 P.M, while the defacto complainant was returning home, the accused hit him with a punching block. The defacto complainant sustained injuries and his one tooth was loosened. The victim is aged 60 years.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶24

B.A.No. 7825 OF 2011 2

¶25

Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the case diary.

¶26

The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case.

¶27

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a student in Tourism & Hotel Management and his examinations are going on. The examinations will be over on 2^nd December, 2011. In these circumstances, there will be a direction not to arrest the petitioner till 3^rd December, 2011.

¶28

With the above direction, the Bail Application is

¶29

dismissed.

¶30

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶31

cms

¶32

B.A.No. 7825 OF 2011 3

¶33

K.T.SANKARAN, J .

¶34

B.A.No.7825 OF 2011

¶35

Dated this the 19^th day of October, 2011

¶36

ORDER

¶37

I have perused the Case Diary. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted with reference to Annexures-4 and 5 that on the date of incident, the petitioner was attacked by the defacto complainant and the petitioner was admitted in the hospital for four days. The counsel submits that the police did not register a Crime due to the influence exerted by the defacto complainant in the present case. The learned Public Prosecutor will get further instructions in the matter.

¶38

There will be an interim order not to arrest the petitioner in Crime No.499 of 2011 of Pozhiyoor Police Station (Thiruvananthapuram District) for a period of two weeks.

¶39

Post after ten days.

¶40

H/o.

¶41

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE .

¶42

cms

Akhil R.Ratheesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhil R.Ratheesh 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

Hari Vs State of Kerala

Yadhun Gireesh Vs State of Kerala

S.R.Sreejith Kumar and Others Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Farooq and Others Vs State of Kerala

Rajan Vs State of Kerala

C.B. Sreeraj and 2 Ors. Vs State of Kerala and Another