Dismissed

Nithinraj v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Nov 2018Bail Appl./6084/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In joint bail applications arising from a criminal prosecution for assault and retaliation, the High Court denied both regular and anticipatory bail, holding that the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the victims precluded the legal right to bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail applications B.A.Nos. 6084 and 6240 of 2018 fail and are dismissed; petitioners not entitled to bail.

Nithinraj 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 SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 6084 of 2018

¶6

CRIME NO. 725/2018 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION , Kollam

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 3:

¶8

1 NITHINRAJ AGED 23 YEARS S/O BABURAJAN BABU BHAVANAM KESHAV NAGAR-8, VALATHUNGAL, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM -691018 691018

¶9

2 MAHESH AGED 33 YEARS S/O. MANIYAN, PULIYARA VADAKATHIL, VALATHUNGAL P.O, KOLLAM-691018

¶10

BY ADVS. PRATHEESH.P SMT.S.SEETHA

¶11

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECOTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

PP AJITH MURALI

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2018, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6240/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

B.A.Nos.6084 and 6240 of 2018

¶17

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶21

MONDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶22

Bail Appl..No. 6240 of 2018

¶23

CRIME NO. 725/2018 OF ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION , Kollam

¶24

PETITIONER/NOT ARRAYED AS ACCUSED:

¶25

1 ANEESH @ ELIVAL AGED 25 YEARS S/O ANIRUDHAN, ANEESH BHAVAN, THOTTUVA THEKKATHIL, VALATHUNGAL, ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM 691018

¶26

2 VISHNU AGED 25 YEARS S/O. VELAYUDHAN CHETTIAR, VISHNU BHAVAN, VALATHUNGAL P.O., KOLLAM - 691018.

¶27

BY ADVS. SRI.PRATHEESH.P SMT.S.SEETHA

¶28

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶29

STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ,ERNAKULAM

¶30

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- AJITH MURALI

¶31

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2018, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6084/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

B.A.Nos.6084 and 6240 of 2018

¶33

¶34

COMMON ORDER

¶35

Both the applications arise from Crime No.725 of 2018 of Eravipuram Police Station for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 308 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶36

The allegation of the prosecution is that, due to previous enmity, petitioners in both the bail applications trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant on 26.08.2018 at about 11.30p.m. and attacked the defacto complainant with an iron rod. It is alleged that, accused 2 and 3 hit on the body of the defacto complainant and thereafter wrongfully restrained him. First accused hit on the head with an iron rod but, it touched just above the left ear. Alleging that the accused intended to cause fatal or grievous injuries, crime was registered. Apprehending arrest, petitioners have sought bail in B.A.No.6084 of 2018. Apprehending that, they are likely to be implicated, petitioners in B.A.No.6240 of 2018 has sought for anticipatory bail.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that, in fact the defacto complainant herein did not sustain any injuries, on the other hand, accused herein along with others had attacked the friend of the defacto complainant and the friend sustained serious injuries. Crime No.724 of 2018 was registered for that. Annexure-2 is the FIR in that crime. Learned

¶38

B.A.Nos.6084 and 6240 of 2018

¶39

¶40

counsel invited my attention to Annexure-2, in which, it is stated that, defacto complainant herein along with others wrongfully restrained the friend of the accused on 26.08.2018 at 7 p.m. and hit on the various parts of the body. One of the accused hit on the head of the defacto complainant therein with a sword. He was taken to the hospital since he sustained serious injuries.

¶41

Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners in B.A.No.6240 of 2018 have been arrayed as accused. Available records indicate that petitioners herein, as a retaliation for the incident that was the subject matter of Crime No.6240 of 2018, attacked the defacto complainant and others. After the first incident, they trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant herein.

¶42

Both the injured have sustained injury on their head. Having regard to these facts, I feel that, petitioners are not entitled for the benefit of pre-arrest bail.

¶43

Bail applications fail and are dismissed.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

Sbna/

Nithinraj v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nithinraj 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

Navin v Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Muhammed Anas Vs State of Kerala

Indra Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar R Vs State of Kerala

Anand Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Ennance Jose, Vs State of Kerala