The High Court of Kerala dismissed the petitioner's application for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC. The court held that investigation was incomplete and custodial interrogation was necessary, noting the risk of witness intimidation if bail were granted before the offence charges.
The application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.
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 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/28TH BHADRA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 6199 of 2016
CRIME NO. 548/2016 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
DINESHIAL, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. THANKAPPAN ACHARY, KATTUMPURATHU VEEDU, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAULAM. 682031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM.682014.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.V.
P.UBAID, J.
============================
B.A.No.6199 of 2016
============================ Dated this the 19th day of September, 2016
ORDER
The petitioner herein seeks pre arrest bail under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the apprehension of arrest and custodial harassment in connection with Crime No.548 of 2016 of
the Vadakkekara Police Station, registered under Sections of the Indian Penal Code, and under Sections 120(B), 452, 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He is the second accused in the crime.
design hatched by the accused Nos.1 and 2, the other accused trespassed into the house of the complainant at about 1.40 p.m. on 27.04.2016 assaulted him, and inflicted serious injuries on his body, with the knowledge of consequence that the injuries they inflicted may cause death. The injuries were in fact inflicted by the accused Nos.3 and 4. The prosecution allegation is that the accused Nos.3 and
B.A.No.6199 of 2016 2
4 did so as instructed by the accused Nos.1 and 2, or at their instance, as part of a criminal design hatched by them, in view of some dispute between the victim and the first accused. Ofcourse, it is true that the wound certificate in the name of the victim does not show that he had sustained any serious injury in the alleged incident. However, the police report shows that the petitioner herein is a habitual offender involving in crimes and anti social activities, and that besides some six definite crimes registered against him, the police has also initiated proceedings against him under the KAAPA.
materials including the case diary and the report of the investigating officer, I find that some more things remain to be done by the police as part of investigation, and some more witnesses remain to be
B.A.No.6199 of 2016 3
questioned. I find that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely necessary as part of investigation in this case, and I find that the accused will influence or intimidate the witnesses if he is now granted pre arrest bail. However, if the petitioner so opts, he can surrender before the investigating officer or before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. After necessary interrogation, the request for regular bail can well be considered by the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. In the particular facts and circumstances of the case including the seriousness and gravity of the offence alleged, and also the stage of investigation, I find that this is not a fit case where the discretionary relief of pre arrest bail can be granted.
In the result, this application for anticipatory bail is
dismissed.
Sd/P.UBAID, JUDGE
rkj
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to the petitioner given the preliminary stage of investigation and the likelihood of witness intimidation.
Whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for the effective investigation of the offence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
DINESHIAL
STATE OF KERALA
SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
P.UBAID
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
