Dismissed

Nimesh @ Appu v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jun 2018Bail Appl./3439/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A bail application filed by accused Nos. 2 to 4 and 7 under Section 439 CrPC was filed in a robbery case. The High Court, considering the Applicants' habitual criminal antecedents and the heinous nature of the offences, refused bail citing the principle in Neeru Yadav.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; applicants denied liberty; future applications to be decided on merits.

Nimesh @ Appu Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | 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 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 3439 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 477/2018 OF NENMARA POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 2 TO 4 AND 7

¶8

1 NIMESH @ APPU,

¶9

AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.VIJAYAKRISHNAN, KAIPANCHERRY HOUSE,

¶10

AYILUR, PALAKKAD.

¶11

2 AKSHAY,

¶12

AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. SUDEVAN, IDIMPOTTA HOUSE,

¶13

KAIPANCHERRY HOUSE, AYILUR, PALAKKAD.

¶14

3 ISHAK,

¶15

AGED 25 YEARS, S/O.ISMAIL, MANIYATHU VALAPPIL HOUSE,

¶16

OLIPPARA, KAYARADI, PALAKKAD.

¶17

4 ASKAR,

¶18

AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. SALEENA, NEAR PAYYAMKODE CHURCH,

¶19

PAYYAMKODE, KAYARADI, PALAKKAD.

¶20

BY ADV.SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶22

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682031.

¶23

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.B.PRABHAKARAN

¶24

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

¶26

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J

¶27

B.A No.3439 of 2018

¶28

Dated this the 20^th day of June, 2018

¶29

ORDER

¶30

1.This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶31

2.The applicants herein are the accused Nos.2 to 4 and 7 in Crime No.477 of 2018 of the Nenmara Police Station, registered under Sections 341, 323, 395, 506 r/w Sec. 149 of the IPC.

¶32

3.The prosecution allegation is that on 03.04.2018 at 6.50 p.m., the applicants herein along with the rest of the accused, intercepted the car in which the de facto complainant and his brother were travelling and after threatening them, robbed a sum of Rs.60,500/- from their possession.

¶33

4.The learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent. They have been in custody from 27.4.2018 and prays that they be released.

¶34

5.The learned Public Prosecutor has very strenuously opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the applicants are notorious

¶35

B.A No.3439 of 2018

¶36

¶37

criminals with poor antecedents. The 1^st applicant is accused in as many as six crimes committed in the near past. The applicant Nos. 2 to 4 are also habitual offenders with involvement in more than one crimes registered under Sec.307 of the IPC.

¶38

6.I have considered the submissions advanced.

¶39

7.As held by the Apex Court in Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P and Another [(2016) 15 SCC 422], while considering application for grant of bail, the antecedents of the applicants will also have to be considered. In the instant case, the applicants herein are habitual offenders and they are accused of having committed very heinous offences. I find no reason to enlarge the applicants on bail at this stage. It is made clear that the applicants will be at liberty to move the trial court at a later stage. If such an application is filed,

¶40

the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed on its merits.

¶41

This application is dismissed.

¶42

Sd/RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

¶43

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

¶44

Nimesh @ Appu v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nimesh @ Appu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Khader Vs State of Kerala

Geetha Devi Vs State of Kerala

Aneesh Vs Sub Inspector of Police, Varapuzha Police Station

Santhosh Sivanarayanan Vs the State of Kerala

Abdul Shibu Vs State of Kerala

Balaji @ Ilankeswaranrthik Vs State of Kerala