Dismissed

Shanavas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Jul 2018Bail Appl./4474/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses the petitioner's second anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that the pleaded change of circumstances, specifically the illness of the mother, does not constitute a valid ground for granting anticipatory bail in a second application. The application is dismissed without further consideration.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; no ground for entertaining second application.

Shanavas Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶3

FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 22nd Ashadha, 1940

¶4

Bail Appl..No. 4474 of 2018

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 15/2017 OF THE COURT OF SESSIONS,KOZHIKODE AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Bail Appl. 441/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶6

CRIME NO. 304/2016 OF THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1 :-

¶8

SHANAVAS, S/O HASSAN,AGED 35 YEARS,VELLIKETTUMMAL HOUSE, PUTHUPADY,THAMARASSERY,KOZHIKKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.BABU S. NAIR SRI.N.V.MUHAMMED BASHEER

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT :-

¶11

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

¶12

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY POLICE STATION,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673573.

¶13

R BY SRI.C.K.SURESH, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

SMA

¶16

K.ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶17

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶18

B.A No. 4474 of 2018

¶19

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶20

Dated this the 13^th day of July, 2018

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Petition filed under section 438 Cr.P.C

¶23

Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.304 of

¶24

2016 of Thamarassery Police Station registered for the offences under sections 120B and 420 of the IPC. Along with the first informant, he was doing business in the purchase and sale of recharge coupons of mobile phones in Dubai. In March 2016, they purchased recharge coupons valued at Rs.2.72 crore on credit, after issuing a cheque of the first informant as security. The recharge coupons were sold. It is alleged that pursuant to the conspiracy entered into between the petitioner and the coaccused, the petitioner siphoned off the amount.

¶25

The learned counsel submits that the allegations

¶26

are false.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶28

the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶29

This is the second application filed by the

¶30

B.A No. 4474 of 2018

¶31

¶32

petitioner under section 482 Cr.P.C. The first one, was disposed by Annexure B order. This court found that the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Now after more than one year he has filed this second application. The change of circumstances pleaded is that his mother is ill. That is no ground which may be taken notice of in anticipatory bail application. This bail application cannot be entertained.

¶33

In the result this Bail Application is dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will surrender before the investigating officer within 10 days. This is recorded.

¶34

Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW,

JUDGE

//True Copy//

PA TO JUDGE

SMA

Shanavas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanavas 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

Liju Ommen Thomas Vs Sarath Lal

Rashid Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Manaf C.K Vs State of Kerala

Radhamani Vs State of Kerala

Nikhil Jacob Vs Dana Paul

Praveen Vs State of Kerala