Dismissed

Suresh Kumar @ Wilson v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jun 2014Bail Appl./2729/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 326 IPC was dismissed regarding pre-arrest bail. Court directed petitioners to surrender before the investigating officer on a fixed date and allowed bail request after arrest upon prior notice to the Assistance Public Prosecutor.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail refused. Petitioners directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 12.06.2014 at 10 a.m. Notice to AAP required if arrested.

Suresh Kumar @ Wilson Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/16TH JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2729 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 113/2014 OF MALAYINKEEZH POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED 1 AND 2:

¶8

1. SURESH KUMAR @ WILSON AGED 50 YEARS S/O.SAMUEL, KUZHITHALAMCODU, ARUVIPPARA MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

2. SHAJI AGED 23 YEARS S/O.KARUNAKARAN, R.K.BHAVAN, NELLIKATTUVILA MALAYINKEEZHU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALAYINKIL.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV. LALIZA

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

¶16

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

¶17

B.A.No.2729 of 2014

¶18

============================ Dated this the 06^th day of June, 2014

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2, in Crime No.113 of 2014 of the Malayinkil Police Station for the offences punishable under Secs.341, 294(b), 323, 324 and 326 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that on 12.02.2014 at the relevant time and place, the petitioners attacked the de facto complainant with granite stone and inflicted several injuries.

¶22

Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. The de facto complainant was seen in nude in the vicinity of house of the petitioners and staring at daughter of the first petitioner. She raised alarm. The de facto complainant ran away. The petitioner made a complaint to the police. The Sub Inspector went to the house of the de facto complainant and saw him with injury. Case was registered only on 14.02.2014.

¶23

I have gone through the CD file. In the first information statement, the reason for delay in giving information is given as that the de facto complainant was under the impression that the hospital

¶24

B.A.No.2729 of 2014

¶25

¶26

authorities would intimate the police about the matter. The wound certificate shows that the de facto complainant was brought to the causality ward of the Medical College Hospital on 12.02.2014. It is also seen that he sustained several fractures apart from the lacerated wounds.

¶27

In the above circumstances and having regard to the investigation required to be done, request of the petitioners for pre-arrest bail cannot be allowed.

¶28

Learned counsel requested that the petitioners may be permitted to surrender before the investigating officer.

¶29

Let the petitioners surrender before the officer investigating the case on 12.06.2014 at 10a.m and on other dates as the investigating officer may direct in case interrogation is not completed. In case the petitioners are arrested, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate as early as possible where it is open to the petitioners to request for bail with intimation given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned atleast two working days in advance.

¶30

The application is disposed of with the above direction.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶33

Sbna

¶34

True Copy

¶35

P A to Judge

Suresh Kumar @ Wilson v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar @ Wilson 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

K.v.Rajan Vs the State of Kerala

Aumkarnadh Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Poulose Vs State of Kerala

Sandeep Vs State of Kerala

Rejin Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Vs State of Kerala