Dismissed

Mansoor v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Sept 2018Bail Appl./3297/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant, an 18th accused, faced charges of facilitating police personnel escape and attacking them. The court found prima facie materials pointing to involvement and serious injuries to police, rejecting pre-arrest bail.

What did the court decide?

Application for pre-arrest bail dismissed; applicant directed to surrender forthwith and seek regular bail.

Mansoor Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 4TH ASWINA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3297 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 2944/2016 OF Kayamkulam Police Station , Alappuzha

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

MANSOOR

¶9

AGED 24 YEARS, S/O JABBARUKUTTY, KAROOTTILPADITTATHIL HOSUE, PERINGALA, P.O., KAYAMKULAM,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.S.L.SYLAJA

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688524.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI CN PRABHAKARAN SR PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This application is filed under §438 Cr.P.C.

¶19

The applicant herein is the 18^th accused in Crime No.

¶20

Bail Appl..No. 3297 of 2018

¶21

¶22

2944/2016 registered at Kayamkulam Police Station and in the said crime he faced allegations of having committed offence punishable under §§ 323, 324, 341, 307, 333, 506, 34 of IPC.

¶23

According to the prosecution, on 22.10.2016 a special investigation team headed by an Assistant Sub Inspector of Police arrested one Unnikrishnan who was the accused in Crime No. 2924/2016 of the Kayamkulam Police Station. Immediately thereafter, the accused Nos. 1 to 3 reached the spot and they along with others are alleged to have attacked the police personnel and enabled the arrested person to escape from police custody. The applicant herein was allegedly present at the scene of Crime and he along with accused Nos. 17, 19, 20 and 21 facilitated the escape of the 3^rd accused from the clutches of the police. It is further alleged that the accused Nos. 12 and 18 assisted the 3^rd accused to remove the hand cuffs. In the course of investigation, offence under §§ 212, 353 and various provisions of the Prevention of Damages to Public Property Act, 1984 was also added.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the applicant was included in the array of the

¶25

Bail Appl..No. 3297 of 2018

¶26

¶27

accused at a later stage. It is further submitted that the only allegation against the applicant is that he had given safe harbour to accused No.3.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor has strenuously opposed the prayer. It is submitted that all the accused except accused Nos. 5 to 9, 18 and 21 have been arrested by the police. The applicant herein has managed to keep away from the long arms of law till date.

¶29

I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary which is made available. Prima facie, it appears that there are materials pointing to the involvement of the applicant. The injuries suffered by the police personnel appears to be very serious. Having regard to the nature of allegations and the role assigned to the applicant, I am not persuaded to invoke the powers under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the applicant. I direct the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer or the court having jurisdiction forthwith and seek regular bail. If an application for bail is preferred, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed expeditiously and on its

¶30

Bail Appl..No. 3297 of 2018

¶31

¶32

merits.

¶33

This application will stand dismissed.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Dxy

¶38

//True Copy// P.A.To Judge

Mansoor v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mansoor 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

Manoj Vs State of Kerala

Divya Vs State of Kerala

Prasanth C.K. Vs State of Kerala

Seon Varghese Vs State of Kerala

Sumayya Rahim Vs the State of Kerala

Subhash Kumar Vs the State of Kerala