Dismissed

Bineesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Nov 2015Bail Appl./6778/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam dismissed a bail application (No. 6778 of 2015) filed by an accused in a criminal charge related to assault and annoyance of women. The court found clear indications of an offence under Section 354 IPC, rejecting the claim that a Section 308 IPC case could not lie due to lack of external injuries.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; petitioner not granted pre-arrest bail.

Bineesh Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6778 of 2015

¶6

CRIME NO. 382/2015 OF ATHOLY POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

BINEESH, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN, KANIYANIKUNI, KUNNATHAR POST, PUTHENCHERY, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ATHOLI POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.R. REMA

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

A.HARIPRASAD, J.

¶16

B.A. No.6778 of 2015

¶17

Dated this the 26^th day of November, 2015

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶20

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.382 of 2015 of Atholi Police Station registered for offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341, 352, 354, 294(b) and 308 I.P.C.

¶21

Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused went to the hotel run by the defacto complainant and wanted to consume alcohol from the hotel. When it was prevented, he abused the defacto complainant and her husband. Thereafter, after consuming alcohol, he entered the hotel through the back side and he tore the blouse of the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offence under Section 354 I.P.C. It is also alleged that the accused beat the defacto complainant's husband with a firewood. The incident was on 18-10-2015 at about 16.30 hours.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have perused the case diary and the

¶23

B.A. No.6778 of 2015 2

¶24

wound certificate.

¶25

There is no external injury sustained by the defacto complainant and her husband. Therefore, prima facie, case of committing an offence under Section 308 I.P.C may not lie.

¶26

However, there are clear indications to constitute an offence under Section 354 I.P.C. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence the bail application is dismissed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

A.HARIPRASAD, amk JUDGE.

¶29

//True copy//

¶30

P.A to Judge

Bineesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bineesh 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

Rejeendran @ Biju Vs State of Kerala

Shivashanmugham Vs State of Kerala

Suhara.a Vs State of Kearala

Shameera Santhosh Vs State of Kerala

Gokul Vs the State of Kerala

Noble Mathew Vs State of Kerala