Disposed

Bijimon @ Shijin v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Jul 2016Bail Appl./5307/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of a pre-arrest bail application by refusing immediate grant, directing the petitioner to surrender to the Investigating Officer for interrogation, and stating that a regular bail application must be filed subsequently for consideration.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender for interrogation; regular bail application to be filed subsequently for consideration by Magistrate.

Bijimon @ Shijin Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2016/3RD SRAVANA, 1938 Bail Appl..No. 5307 of 2016 () -------------------------------

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN Bail Appl. 5120/2016 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 13-07-2016

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMP 1556/2016 of D.C. & SESSIONS COURT,KOTTAYAM DATED 28-06-2016 CRIME NO. 887/2016 OF GANDHINAGAR POLICE STATION , KOTTAYAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

BIJIMON @ SHIJIN AGED 23 YEARS, S/O SABU, THURUTHUMALIYIL, MANNANAM KARA, ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY SRI.D.FEROZE

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031 (CRIME NO. 887/2016 OF GANDHI NAGAR POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT)

¶12

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA T.Y.

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-07-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

P.UBAID, J.

¶16

- - - - B.A.No. 5307 of 2016

¶17

- - - - Dated this the 25^th day of July, 2016

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner herein seeks pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest in connection with Crime No. 887 of 2016 of the Gandhi Nagar Police Station, registered under Sections 143, 147, 341, 294(b), 506(ii), 323 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. He is the first accused in the above crime.

¶20

The prosecution case is that at about 8.45 p.m. on 19.6.2016, the petitioner and the co-accused assaulted the defacto complainant, and inflicted injuries on his body with weapon, with the knowledge of consequence that the injuries may cause death.

¶21

This application for pre-arrest bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely

¶22

B.A.No. 5307 of 2016

¶23

-2-

¶24

necessary as part of investigation, and that if the accused is now released, he will definitely obstruct the proper and effective investigation.

¶25

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. It is submitted that the allegation under Section 308 of IPC is baseless. The wound certificate in the name of the complainant shows that he had sustained two lacerated wounds over the vertex of scalp, and another lacerated wound of 1 x 0.5 cms over the forehead in the alleged incident. In the nature of the allegations, I feel it appropriate to direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation. The police report shows that the accused Nos. 1 and 2 were arrested during investigation. The report does not show whether they are on bail. Anyway, let the request for bail can be considered by the learned Magistrate having

¶26

B.A.No. 5307 of 2016

¶27

-3-

¶28

jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate will examine the case records, and see whether the required elements under Section 308 of IPC are there in the prosecution records.

¶29

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

¶30

a) The petitioner will surrender

¶31

before the Investigating Officer, if he so opts, 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.

¶32

b) After necessary interrogation,

¶33

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

¶34

c) In case application for regular

¶35

bail is filed by the petitioner, the same shall

¶36

B.A.No. 5307 of 2016

¶37

-4-

¶38

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

Sd/- P.UBAID

JUDGE

//True copy//

P.A. to Judge

Bijimon @ Shijin v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijimon @ Shijin 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

Thressiamma Vs State of Kerala

E K Rajan Vs State of Kerala

Babu Vs State of Kerala

Zakeer Hussain Vs State of Kerala

S.J.Satheesh Vs State of Kerala

Safeer Vs State of Kerala