Disposed

Sujith v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Jun 2016Bail Appl./4133/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a pre-arrest bail application under Section 438 CrPC, holding that custodial interrogation was necessary for investigation. The petitioner was ordered to surrender within seven days for interrogation, after which bail would be considered by the Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender for interrogation within seven days; regular bail to be considered by Magistrate after interrogation.

Sujith 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 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/8TH ASHADHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 4133 of 2016 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 881/2016 of D.C & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM DATED 24-05-2016 CRIME NO. 478/2016 OF MARAYAMUTTAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/2ND ACCUSED:

¶8

SUJITH, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O SAJEEV, MANALIVILA, LEKSHAM VEEDU, MARAYAMUTTAM DESOM, PERUMKADAVILA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.D.KISHORE

¶10

SMT.MINI GOPINATH

¶11

SMT.MEERA GOPINATH

¶12

SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA)

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE AND COMPLAINANT:

¶14

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

¶15

HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031

¶16

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAYAMUTTAM POLICE STATION,

¶17

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 001

¶18

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

P.UBAID, J.

B.A.No. 4133 of 2016

- - - - Dated this the 29^th day of June, 2016

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The petitioner herein seeks pre-arrest bail under

¶27

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest and custodial harassment in connection with Crime No. 478 of 2016 of the Marayamuttam Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶28

The prosecution case is that the petitioner and the co-accused assaulted the defacto complainant at about 7.45 p.m. on 21.4.2016, and inflicted simple and grievous injuries on his body with weapons. The medical documents show that the complainant had sustained traumatic head injury involving fracture.

¶29

This application for pre-arrest bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that

¶30

B.A.No. 4133 of 2016

¶31

-2-

¶32

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.

¶33

On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the materials including the case diary, I find that the petitioner cannot be immediately released under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the nature of the allegations and the materials so far collected, I feel it appropriate to direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation. Without such interrogation for the collection of materials concerning him, his complicity and involvement, and the nature of the weapons used, investigation cannot be completed. After such interrogation, the request for bail can be considered appropriately by the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. It is submitted that the allegation under Section 308 of IPC

¶34

B.A.No. 4133 of 2016

¶35

-3-

¶36

is baseless. However, I find a strong case under Section 326 of IPC. Let the factual aspects be gone into by the learned Magistrate, and let it be examined whether this is a case of assault, or a case involving the elements of Section 308 of IPC.

¶37

In the result, this application for bail is

¶38

disposed of as follows:

¶39

a) The petitioner will surrender before the investigating officer between 9.00 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. on any day within seven days from this date for the purpose of interrogation as part of investigation.

¶40

b) After necessary interrogation, the investigating officer will produce the petitioner before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction by 4 pm. on the date of arrest itself.

¶41

B.A.No. 4133 of 2016

¶42

-4-

¶43

c) In case application for regular bail is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be judiciously considered and decided by the learned Magistrate on the same day on merits.

Sd/- P.UBAID

JUDGE ds

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Sujith v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujith 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

Fazalu Rahman K.K Vs the State of Kerala

Prabhu Krishnan Vs State of Kerala

Deepak Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Vs State of Kerala

Shahul Hameed.C.a Vs State of Kerala

Suresh K. Vs State of Kerala