Dismissed

Sreekanth v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Oct 2016Bail Appl./6772/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court dismissed an application for anticipatory bail filed by the 2nd accused in a case involving transport of ganja. The court held that granting preventive bail was unjustified due to the nature of the offence and the accused fleeing the scene.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application dismissed; petitioner allowed to surrender within ten days for bail consideration by Magistrate.

Sreekanth Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/25TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6772 of 2016 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 9/2016 OF EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶7

------------------------

¶8

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

¶9

SREEKANTH, AGED 22, S/O.BABU, THRITHIYIL KOCHUPARAMBIL, ALAPPAD VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. SRI.VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN SRI.U.M.HASSAN

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SAJJU.S.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

sts

¶16

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J

¶17

B.A.No.6772 of 2016

¶18

Dated this the 17^th day of October, 2016

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in Crime No.9/2016 of Excise Range, Karunagappally, registered for the offences under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶21

The prosecution allegation is that on 04.07.2016 at about 8.15 pm, the petitioner and the other accused were found transporting 1.175 kg of ganja for the purpose of sale, on the scooters bearing registration Nos.KL-23-L-350 and KL23-H-1425 in contravention of the provisions of the NDPS Act. The petitioner ran away from the scene on seeing the police, leaving the scooter there.

¶22

The petitioner has filed this application under

¶23

Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶24

Heard.

¶25

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the

¶26

application. It appears that both the accused were seen coming together, by the excise party. However, on seeing the excise

¶27

party, the petitioner ran away leaving the scooter there. On

¶28

¶29

B.A.No.6772 of 2016

¶30

inspection of the scooter of the petitioner, 75g of gnaja was found and on inspection of the scooter of the other accused, 1.1 kg of ganja was found. It appears from the case diary that the petitioner ran away on seeing the excise party. It further appears from the case diary that there are materials to connect the petitioner with the commission of the offence. Considering the nature of the offence alleged against the petitioner, I am of the view that an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner will not be justified.

¶31

In the result, this application stands dismissed.

¶32

However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to surrender before the investigating officer within ten days, if so advised. If the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer, the investigating officer shall produce the petitioner before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day after interrogation. If the petitioner files any application for bail on his production before the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate shall consider and dispose of the application for bail strictly on merits, as expeditiously as possible.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE

¶35

¶36

// True Copy //

¶37

P.A. to Judge

Sreekanth v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekanth 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

Ameen.v.P. Vs State of Kerala

Mansoor Abdullah Vs the State of Kerala

Rafi Vs State of Kerala

Chandramohanan Vs P.G.Ramachandran Nair and Another

Vinod Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Chenthamara Vs State of Kerala