Dismissed

Bipin v. Vs State of Kerala

Kerala HC30 Aug 2016Bail Appl./5480/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court rejected an application for pre-arrest bail (anticipatory bail) from an accused in a gang assault case involving attempted murder. The court held that interrogation in custody was essential and injuries to the victim were severe, making pre-arrest bail inappropriate.

What did the court decide?

Pre arrest bail application dismissed; petitioner directed to surrender for bail consideration.

Bipin v Vs State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/8TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5480 of 2016

¶6

CRIME NO. 2168/2015 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

¶8

BIPIN V., THODIYIL VEEDU, KALAKKODU P.O., BHOOTHAKULAM, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

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

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM-688 031

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA R.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

msv/

¶16

P.UBAID,J.

¶17

B.A No.5480 of 2016

¶18

Dated this the 30^th day of August, 2016

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner herein is the 3^rd accused in Crime No.2168/2015 of the Paravoor Police Station, registered under Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b), 324 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He seeks pre arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest.

¶21

The prosecution case is that at about 8.30 pm on 25.12.2015 a gang of persons including the petitioner herein assaulted the defacto complainant and inflicted serious injuries on his body with the weapons like sword, iron rod etc. in an attempt on his life. The petitioner is said to be one of the identifiable persons mentioned in the FIR. In the statement given to the learned Magistrate also, the complainant has alleged the involvement of many persons including some identifiable persons. The prosecution records reveal that the petitioner herein was identified by the victim as one of the assailants.

¶22

On a perusal of the wound certificate I find that the victim had sustained severe injuries in the alleged incident, including head injury. It appears prima facie that such injuries were inflicted by

¶23

B.A No.5480 of 2016 2

¶24

the assailants either in an attempt on the life of the complainant, or with the full knowledge of consequence that such injuries may cause death. In the above situation, I am not inclined to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioner. There is report that three of the accused are already on bail. If the petitioner so opts, he can very well surrender before the investigating officer or before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. In case he so surrendered, his application for bail will be considered by the court below on the date of filing itself. Pre arrest bail as such cannot be now granted. I find that this is not a case where discretion of the Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C can be exercised.

¶25

On a perusal of the case diary I find that interrogation of the petitioner in custody is absolutely necessary in this case. Such interrogation for the collection of some materials concerning the role and complicity of each of the accused, the actual motive for the alleged incident, the nature and number of the weapons used, the persons who actually used the weapons, the object of the alleged attack etc; is felt necessary.

¶26

In the result, this petition is dismissed.

¶27

Sd/P.UBAID JUDGE

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Bipin v. Vs State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin v. Vs 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

Abineeth Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Sujith Raj a. Vs State of Kerala

M.Muraleedharan Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Aboobakkar V.S Vs State of Kerala

Sanjith @ Sreekutan Vs State of Kerala

P.S.Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala