The High Court of Kerala rejected a pre-arrest bail application. The court held that custodial interrogation of the accused was necessary for the investigation and thus pre-arrest bail could not be granted at this stage.
Pre-arrest bail refused; applicant directed to surrender to Investigating Officer within seven days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
MONDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2016/9TH JYAISHTA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 2579 of 2016
CRIME NO. 175/2016 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION , THRISSUR DISTRICT
APPLICANT(S)/11TH ACCUSED :
PRAJITH RICH, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. JAYAPRAKASH, PONATHIL HOUSE, PAINOOR DESOM, PERINGOTTUKARA POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL SMT.R.RAJITHA SMT.VINAYA V.NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & VICTIMS :
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERLAA, ERNAKULAM.
DEEPU, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, KAITHAVALAPPIL HOUSE, KAZHIMBRAM BEACH, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 568.
SREESAN, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O. CHAKRAPANI, NEDIYIRIPPIL HOUSE, KAZHIMBRAM BEACH, VALAPPAD VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 568.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y.LALIZA R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
P.UBAID, J.
ORDER
The petitioner herein is the 11th accused in Crime No. 175 of 2016 of Valapad Police Station registered under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 308, 506(ii) and 307 read with Section 149 of IPC. On the apprehension of arrest, he seeks pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. There are altogether 12 accused in the crime. The Police had already arrested some of the accused and they are on bail. Some are yet to be arrested by the Police.
B.A.No. 2579 of 2016
-2-
investigation is at the preliminary stage, that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary as part of investigation, and that, if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the proper and effective investigation.
B.A.No. 2579 of 2016
-3-
felt necessary for the collection of some materials concerning him as an identifiable person, I feel it not appropriate to grant him pre-arrest bail. He will have to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days and after necessary interrogation, the request for bail can be considered by the learned Magistrate. All the factual aspects including the reason stated by the learned counsel be considered by the learned Magistrate.
With the above observation, this application is disposed of.
Sd/- P.UBAID
JUDGE
ds
//True copy//
P.A. to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to an accused seeking relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether the facts justify the necessity of custodial interrogation for the investigation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
PRAJITH RICH
STATE OF KERALA
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
