In a pre-arrest bail application regarding unauthorized sand removal, the High Court disposed of the matter directing the learned Magistrate to decide the application for regular bail judiciously on the date of filing.
May file regular bail application for decision on date of application.
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 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/30TH JYAISHTA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 4418 of 2016 ()
CRIME NO. 578/2016 OF PAZHAYANNUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT
PETITIONER(S) :
1. KRISHNA KUMAR 41 YEARS, S/O. NARAYANAN KUTTY, KANIYATH HOUSE, PALAPPURAM P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
2.
SHIBU 38 YEARS, S/O. PANKUNNI, KANIARKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MANISSERY P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
3. FIROZE 28 YEARS, S/O. ABDULRAHIMAN, AMBALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, VARODE P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM
RESPONDENT :
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. R. REMA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------B.A No. 4418 of 2016
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2016
O R D E R
The petitioners herein seek pre arrest bail in a crime registered under Section 379 IPC and under Sections 20 and 21 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act (Sand Act). The prosecution case is that the petitioners were 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 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
2
B.A No. 4418 of 2016
decision on the request for bail. The petitioners can very well surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction, and make application under Section 437 Cr.P.C.
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 petitioners in Crime No.578/2016 of the Pazhayannur 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
ab
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the bail application should be disposed of with directions to the magistrate.
Whether the magistrates should decide regular bail applications on the date of application.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
KRISHNA KUMAR AND OTHERS
STATE OF KERALA
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
