Dismissed

Jaffarkutty @ Jaffar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Mar 2017Bail Appl./1258/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed bail applications filed by the third accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Quote defended for allegedly assaulting the victim with a stick in a joint attack involving others resulting in a stab injury. The court found common intention and held it was not a fit case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail Applications Nos. 1258 and 1430 of 2017 are dismissed.

Jaffarkutty @ Jaffar Vs State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/23RD PHALGUNA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 1258 of 2017

¶6

CRIME NO. 280/2017 OF PUNALUR POLICE STATION , KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/3RD ACCUSED :

¶8

JAFFARKUTTY @ JAFFAR, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.BASHEER, CHARUVILA VEEDU, CHALAKKODU, PAPER MILL, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 31.

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUNALUR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 305.

¶13

BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.K.SURESH FOR ADGP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-03-2017, ALONG WITH BA. NO. 1430 OF 2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶17

B.A.Nos. 1258 & 1430 of 2017

¶18

Dated this the 14^th day of March, 2017

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶21

Petitioner in B.A.No.1258 of 2017 is the third accused and the petitioner in B.A.No.1430 of 2017 is the first accused in Crime No.280 of 2017 of Punalur Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 307, 323 and 324 IPC.

¶22

According to the prosecution the first petitioner and the second accused took the victim who was sleeping in his house, in an autorickshaw to a building where the petitioners and the co-accused assaulted him with hands, sticks, soda bottles and knife. The victim sustained a stab injury in the left flank.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

There is no dispute that the victim sustained a stab injury in the left flank apart from some other injuries. The incident happened in the afternoon. The victim had every opportunity to identify his assailants. That apart the petitioners were known to the victim. The specific allegation is that the first accused assaulted the victim with a stick, the second accused with a broken soda bottle, the third accused with hands

¶25

B.A.Nos. 1258 & 1430 of 2017 2

¶26

and the 4^th accused with knife. The facts of the case definitely indicate common intention on the part of the petitioners and the co-accused. The petitioners cannot be heard to say that they did not inflict any stab injury on the victim. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

¶27

In the result, these Bail Applications are dismissed.

¶28

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶29

Jaffarkutty @ Jaffar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaffarkutty @ Jaffar 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

Shajina C.P. Vs State of Kerala

Remesan Vs State of Kerala

Remesan Vs State of Kerala

C.P.Jaleel Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rahman Vs State of Kerala

Dr.U.Lazar John Vs State of Kerala