Dismissed

Jalajan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2017Bail Appl./720/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The accused, alleged to be the owner and driver of a vehicle transporting pepper, were implicated in assaulting check post employees. The court found their presence near the border and time of incident sufficient to suspect involvement, making it an unfit case for anticipatory bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail applications were dismissed due to sufficient suspicion based on telephonic evidence matching presence at the time and location of the incident.

Jalajan Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | 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 FEBRUARY 2017/25TH MAGHA, 1938

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 720 of 2017 () -----------------------------CRIME NO. 24/2017 OF KAMBAMMETTU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶6

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :

¶7

JALAJAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.JOHN VARKEY, PACKAL HOUSE, CHELACHUVADU, CHELACHUVADU P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.V.REJANISH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :

¶10

STATE OF KERALA, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAMBAMMETTU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶11

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SAJJU S.

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J. --------------------------------------B.A.Nos.720 and 1160 2017

¶15

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2017

¶16

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶17

The petitioner in B.A.No.1160/2017 and

¶18

B.A.No.720/2017 are accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively in Crime No.24/2017 of Kambammettu Police Station registered for the offences under Sections 332 IPC read with Section 3(1) of PDPP Act and Section 49 of the VAT Act. The allegation against them is that without paying tax they transported dried pepper from Kerala to Tamil Nadu in a jeep, in the course of which they went past the sales tax check post at Kambammettu; the 2^nd accused was the driver of the vehicle. He smashed the barricade put up across the road at the check post and assaulted the employees of the department posted there before he escaped.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

¶20

the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

The petitioners' case is that they are falsely implicated in the case. I have perused the case diary. Even the vehicle or its driver could not be identified by the sales tax officers. Later, it was revealed that the vehicle was the one

¶22

¶23

B.A.Nos.720 and 1160 2017

¶24

bearing registration No.KL-06-H-1456. The investigation further revealed that the 1^st accused is the owner of the vehicle and the 2^nd accused is its driver. The investigating officer has collected call records of the petitioners from the service providers. The records show that both petitioners were present near the boarder of the State at the time of the occurrence, which was mid night. Immediately before the occurrence they were present in Kerala and immediately after the incident they were present in Tamil Nadu. So, there is sufficient reason to suspect their involvement in the incident. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

¶25

In the result, these applications are dismissed.

¶26

Sd/K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶27

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

P.A. to Judge

Jalajan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jalajan 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

C.P.Jaleel Vs State of Kerala

Jaffarkutty @ Jaffar Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rahman Vs State of Kerala

Praveen Chandran Vs State of Kerala

Paulose Vs State of Kerala

Stephen Vs State of Kerala