Dismissed

Ajaya Khosh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Feb 2016Bail Appl./201/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding offences under sections 143, 147, 279, 323, 324, 427, 354 and 149 of IPC, the High Court denied pre-arrest bail to one petitioner due to unconfirmed identity of other accused and incident timing, but permitted third petitioner to surrender with specific conditions before investigation.

What did the court decide?

Third petitioner permitted to surrender before investigation officer; pre-arrest bail denied to third petitioner pending investigation confirmation of other accused identities.

Ajaya Khosh Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/28TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 201 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 2585/2015 OF OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

1. AJAYAKHOSH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAN, EDAKKATTU VEEDU,

¶9

VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O,

¶10

THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶11

2. PRAVEEN DAS K.V, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.DASAN, KOTTIL HOUSE, VARAKKARA P.O,

¶12

KALAKALLU, THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶13

3. RENJITH, AGED 30 YEARS,

¶14

S/O.ARAVINDAKSHAN, CHERUMADATHIL HOUSE, PADINJATTUMANA, VARANTHARAPPILLY P.O,

¶15

THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN

¶17

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶18

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶19

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y.LALIZA

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

mbr/

¶22

SUNIL THOMAS, J.

¶23

B.A.No.201 of 2016

¶24

Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2016

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The petitioners apprehending arrest in Crime No.2585/2015 of Ollur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 279, 323, 324, 427, 354 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶27

When the matter was taken up, the learned

¶28

Public Prosecutor submitted that the 1^st and 2^nd petitioner have not yet been arrayed as an accused and the 3^rd petitioner now stands as the 1^st accused. The allegation of the prosecution is that on 28.12.2015 midnight, while the de facto complainant and his family were travelling in a car along the Thrissur bypass, the 3^rd petitioner chased him in a car and when the car of the de facto complainant took a turn, the car of the petitioner hit on the rear side of the car of the de facto complainant, causing extensive damages. Thereafter, the accused approached them and hit the de facto complainant using a sugarcane stick and

¶29

B.A.No.201 of 2016

¶30

¶31

caused bodily injuries on the face of the father of the de facto complainant. Crime is registered accordingly. The 5^th accused was arrested and released.

¶32

The wound certificate indicates that there were several injuries on the face. The identity of the 2^nd and 3^rd accused is yet to be confirmed. Having regard to the nature of allegations, the fact that incident happened during midnight and the fact that the identity of the 2^nd and 3^rd accused are still not confirmed, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the 3^rd petitioner herein. However, having regard to the fact that the incident is not a pre meditated one and it arose out of a possible road rage and the weapon used is only sugarcane piece, the petitioner is permitted to surrender before the investigation officer. After interrogation and the recovery if any, the petitioner shall produced before the nearest Magistrate and in the event of any bail application being filed, shall be considered by the Magistrate on the same day. It is also made clear that the 3^rd petitioner in the event of surrendering before the Police, shall also produce

¶33

B.A.No.201 of 2016

¶34

¶35

his license and other documents in relation to the vehicle

¶36

in which he was travelling at the time of incident.

¶37

The bail application is disposed of.

¶38

Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE

¶39

¶40

//TRUE COPY//

¶41

P.A. TO JUDGE

Ajaya Khosh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajaya Khosh 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

Ratheesh Vs State of Kerala

Sasi Vs State of Kerala

Sudheer Vs the State of Kerala

Shuhaib Vs the Circle Inspector of Excise

Varkey Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil Moolathil Vs the State of Kerala