Criminal court at Ernakulam dismissed anticipatory bail application filed by three accused charged with insulting the National Flag, ruling that materials indicated their involvement and no suspicion of frivolousness existed.
Application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail dismissed; accused to seek regular bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 1ST KARTHIKA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 6542 of 2018
CRIME NO. 469/2018 OF KOLAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:
2 ASHRAF K., AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM HAJI, KULANGAROTH HOUSE, POYILOOR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.D.FEROZE SRI.D.FEROZE SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031, (CRIME NO.469/2018 OF KOLAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT).
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 693, (CRIME NO.469/2018 OF KOLAVALLUR POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT).
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AJITH MURALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BA:6542/18
2
ORDER
This application is filed under §438 of the Cr.P.C.
BA:6542/18
3
BA:6542/18
4
the Investigating Officer or court having jurisdiction 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 merits.
This application will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE
KRJ
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be granted in an offence under the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act?
Did the court find reasons to suspect the case was frivolous or vexatious?
Whether the collection of materials pointed to the applicants' involvement?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N/AReferred
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Irshad
Ashraf K.
Muhammed Jasim M.P.
State of Kerala
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
