High Court of Kerala disposed of bail application filed in connection with a crime involving alleged abduction, assault, and torture. The court rejected the petitioners' claim of false implication and dismissed the bail plea.
Stay on arrest and bail application 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 SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/30TH MAGHA, 1937
Bail Appl..No. 795 of 2016
CRIME NO. 283/2016 OF KARUNAAGAPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
PETITIONER(S):
1. NOUSHAD, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.ASSANARUKUNJU, NAVAS MANZIL, KALLELIBHAGAM PO, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
2. SHIBU, AGED 35 YEARS, CHEMATH THEKKATHIL, MUZHANGODI, THODIYOOR PO,
3. HARSHAKUMAR V., AGED 32 YEARS, ANIL BHAVANAM, KALLELIBHAGOM PO, KARUNAGAPPALLY.
BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.BINDU GOPINATH
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-02-2016, THE COURT ON 19-02-2016,PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
B.A. No.795 of 2016
O R D E R
Petitioners apprehend arrest and detention in Crime No.
283/2016 of Karunagappally police station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 144,147, 148, 367, 308,395 read with Section 149 IPC.
B.A.No.795/2016 2
the spot and was also beaten. Thereafter, at 7.30 p.m. they were left abandoned. Crime was accordingly registered. Defacto complainant had identified the first and second accused and their names are referred. Investigation disclosed the identity of the remaining accused. Petitioners, contending that they are sought to be falsely implicated, seek bail.
B.A.No.795/2016
3
were also adopted. Though the first informant had specifically identified only two persons, the remaining injured have also specifically identified the other accused. The details of vehicles involved and its owners are also brought on record. Consequently, the identity of persons involved at various stages have been confirmed. Weapons used have not been fully recovered. The place where the incident happened has also been identified. These materials lead to the complicity of the first and third petitioners as accused Nos 3 and 7. There is no allegation against 2nd petitioner. However yet another unidentified person is involved. His identity has to be confirmed. The depth of involvement of each person, the details of involvement of others,etc.are still to be unearthed. Having regard to these facts, I feel that granting of bail to the petitioners may hamper the proper investigation. Petition is accordingly dismissed.
dpk
Sd/SUNIL THOMAS Judge /true copy/ PS to Judge.
B.A.No.795/2016 4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners charged with offences under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 367, 308, 395 read with Section 149 IPC in connection with abduction and assault.
Whether the materials on record demonstrate complicity of the first and third petitioners despite lack of direct identification for all accused.
Whether granting bail would hamper the proper investigation into the triple assault case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Noushad
Shibu
Harshakumar V.
State of Kerala
Sunil Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
