Dismissed

Haris v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Jun 2016Bail Appl./3531/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala denied pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., stating that interrogation is necessary to collect materials concerning the petitioners' involvement and the nature of injuries sustained by the complainant, including recovery of the weapon used in the assault.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender for interrogation; no immediate bail granted.

Haris Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE 2016/1ST ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3531 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 855/2016 OF THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/1ST AND 2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

1. HARIS M.P., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMAD, MEETHALEYPURAYIL, ARIYIL POST, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN: 670 142.

¶9

2. UNAIS K.K., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.SIDDIQUE, KANATHILKOZHUKKAL, ARIYIL POST, PATTUVAOM, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SRI.M.A.AHAMMAD SAHEER

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

¶13

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670 141.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

msv/

¶17

P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------B.A No. 3531 of 2016

¶18

---------------------------------------

¶19

Dated this the 22^nd day of June, 2016

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioners herein seek pre arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest in connection with Crime No.855/2016 of the Taliparamba Police Station, registered under Sections 148, 341, 323, 324 and 427 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

The prosecution case is that at about 10 pm on 11.4.2016 these petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant and inflicted simple and grievous injuries on his body with weapons like stone. On a perusal of the case diary I find the necessity of interrogation of the petitioners for collection of some materials concerning them, their specific involvement in the alleged incident, the nature of injuries sustained and also the weapons used. I am not inclined to release them immediately under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The wound certificate in the name of the complainant shows that he had sustained loss of hearing due to the injuries allegedly inflicted by the petitioners. The learned counsel submitted that the complainant is already partially deaf . He makes such a statement on the ground that no corresponding external injury is noted by the doctor. The way in which the petitioners made the alleged assault will have to be looked

¶23

B.A No. 3531 of 2016 2

¶24

into. Just because no corresponding external injury was not noticed by the doctor it cannot be found that the complainant has partial deafness already. Anyway, let the factual aspects be gone by the learned Magistrate when application for regular bail comes. Without interrogation of the petitioners investigation cannot be completed. The weapon also remains to be recovered.

¶25

In the result, this application for bail is disposed of as follows:

¶26

a) The petitioners will surrender before the investigating officer, if they so opt, between 9 am and 10 am on any day within seven days from this date for the purpose of interrogation as part of investigation.

¶27

b) After necessary interrogation, the

¶28

investigating officer will produce the petitioners before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction by 4 pm. on the date of arrest itself.

¶29

c) In case the application for regular bail filed

¶30

by the petitioners, the same shall be judiciously considered and decided by the learned Magistrate on the same day, on merits.

¶31

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

¶32

Haris v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haris 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

Prathyush Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Haneeswaran.M.v Vs State of Kerala

Suryalayam Reveendran Vs State of Kerala

Sreejith Vs State of Kerala

Binu Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Shafi @ K.M.Shahid Vs State of Kerala