The Kerala High Court dismissed the bail application of the accused. Relying on Kalyan Chandra Sarkar, the court held that in cases of heinous offences, delay in trial or incomplete investigation does not warrant bail.
Bail application dismissed; accused to remain in judicial custody.
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 K.ABRAHAM MATHEW
MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2017/29TH PHALGUNA, 1938
Bail Appl..No. 703 of 2017 ()
CRIME NO. 909/2016 OF KURUPPUMPADY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUHAMMED AMIRUL ISLAM, S/O NIZAMUDHEEN, AGED:22 YEARS, RAMPURSATHRA PANCHAYATH, WARD NO.8, NEAR BAITHOOR MUHRAM JUMA-MASJID, BHOLDA GRAMAM, NOWGONE DISTRICT, ASSAM STATE
BY ADVS.SRI. BIJU ANTONY ALOOR SRI.K.I.TOGI
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AJITH MURALI.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
SKG
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.
B.A.No.703 of 2017
Dated this the 20th day of March, 2017
O R D E R
Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
In the result, this application is dismissed.
K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE
sd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused charged with heinous offences under IPC and the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav and anotherApplied¶24
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav and another [AIR 2004 (SC) 1866] · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Muhammed Amirul Islam
State of Kerala
KAbrham Matthew
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
