Dismissed

Nishad.C.M v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Jun 2017Bail Appl./2381/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam dismissed the bail application of the second accused. Despite the third accused being granted bail, the court refused relief to the petitioner due to specific overt acts alleged and his criminal antecedents. Permission to surrender was granted instead.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail denied; permission to surrender to investigating officer allowed.

Nishad.C.M Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2017/12TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2381 of 2017 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 205/2017 OF KUTTAMPUZHA POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶7

PETITIONER(/ACCUSED NO.2:

¶8

NISHAD.C.M AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. MEERANKUTTY, CHITTEATHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, KOOVAPARA P.O, ERNAKULAM - 686 691.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.B.AJOY

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SHO OF KUTTAMPUZHA POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN - 682 031.

¶12

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

rmm

¶15

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J

¶16

B.A.No.2381 of 2017

¶17

Dated this the 02^nd day of June, 2017

¶18

ORDER

¶19

1.The 2^nd accused in Crime No.205/2017 of Kuttampuzha Police Station has approached this Court with a prayer to release him on pre-arrest bail. He is accused along with others of having committed offences punishable under sections 353, 332, 324, 506, 323, 143, 144, 147, 148, 294b and section 427 r/w section 149 of the IPC.

¶20

2.It appears that on 26.03.2017 at 6.30 p.m., the de facto complainant, a police officer, while on patrol duty, intercepted the 1^st accused who was found smoking in a public place. While he was being questioned, the other accused interfered and deterred the de facto complainant from discharging his official duty. It is specifically alleged in the earlier records that the 1^st and 2^nd accused had assaulted the police officer and had caused him injuries.

¶21

3.I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶22

B.A.No.2381 of 2017

¶23

¶24

petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶25

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the 3^rd accused has been released on bail by this Court by order dated 23.05.2017 in B.A.No.3126/2017 and the same relief be granted to the petitioner herein as well.

¶26

5.The learned Public Prosecutor, opposing the contentions would submit that relief was granted to the 3^rd accused as no overt act was alleged and he was a person with no criminal antecedents. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, specific overt act has been alleged and he is also a person involved in several crimes.

¶27

6.Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the antecedents of the petitioner as well as the nature of the allegations, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner herein. This application is therefore dismissed.

¶28

7.However, at this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays that he be permitted to

¶29

B.A.No.2381 of 2017

¶30

¶31

surrender before the investigating officer and to cooperate with the investigation. If the petitioner is so advised, he may surrender before the investigating officer, who shall interrogate him. If arrest of the petitioner is found necessary, the investigating officer shall thereafter produce him before the jurisdictional Magistrate within the statutory period. On such production, if an application for bail is filed, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, expeditiously.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶34

Bb/03/06/2017

¶35

[True copy]

¶36

P.A to Judge

Nishad.C.M v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nishad.C.M 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpakumari Vs State of Kerala

Visalakshy Vs State of Kerala

Susheela Vs State of Kerala

Sumish K M Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Aslam Vs the Station House Officer

Rajesh Kumar.P Vs State of Kerala