Disposed

Sukumaran T.V. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jul 2016Bail Appl./3695/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of a pre-arrest bail application in an illegal sand removal case, directing the learned Magistrate to decide on regular bail applications judiciously on the date of filing, noting the petitioner's involvement in four other crimes.

What did the court decide?

Bail application disposed; magistrate directed to decide regular bail application on the date of filing.

Sukumaran T.V. Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JULY 2016/21ST ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3695 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 309/2016 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION , KASARAGOD DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶8

SUKUMARAN T.V.,

¶9

AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.K.P.CHERIYAMBU, RESIDING AT KOYITHURUTHI, UDINOOR P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT/STATE :

¶12

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

¶13

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, (CRIME NO.309/2016 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT)- 671 315.

¶14

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y.LALIZA

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

P. UBAID, J.

B.A.No.3695 of 2016

Dated this the 12^th day of July, 2016

¶20

The petitioner herein seeks pre-arrest bail in a crime registered under Section 379 IPC and under Section 20 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act (Sand Act). The prosecution case is that the petitioner was found illicitly transporting river sand in a vehicle. The police incorporated Section 379 IPC in the FIR on the allegation that sand was unauthorizedly removed from the river bank. On a perusal of the materials, I find that what is prominently alleged by the prosecution is unauthorized or illicit removal of river sand punishable under Section 20 of the Sand Act, which is bailable and cognizable under the law. It is settled that if the allegations constitute any offence under IPC, the police can proceed accordingly besides the prosecution under the Sand Act. However, the main allegation will have to be looked into by

¶21

¶22

B.A.No.3695 of 2016

¶23

the court when an application for bail comes. In the particular circumstances of this case it would be appropriate to direct the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction to take decision on the request for bail. The petitioner can very well surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction, and make application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. There is police report that the petitioner is involved in four other crimes. This will have to be examined by the learned Magistrate in detail in the process of taking decision on the request for regular bail.

¶24

In the result, this bail application is disposed of, with a direction to the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction that in case application for regular bail is filed by the petitioner in Crime No.309 of 2016 of the Chandera Police Station, the same shall be judiciously and appropriately decided on the date of application itself.

Sd/-

P. UBAID, JUDGE

// True Copy // P.A. to Judge

Sukumaran T.V. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukumaran T.V. 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

Anilkumar @ Anil Vs State of Kerala

P.Rajeev Vs State of Kerala

C.v.Rappai Vs State of Kerala

Rahul.M. Vs State of Kerala

G.Srinivasan Vs State of Kerala

Ibrahim Vs State of Kerala