Anticipatory bail application dismissed by High Court of Kerala for three petitioners accused of offences under Sections 341, 326, 307 IPC read with Section 34, citing antecedent convictions and serious criminal record of one petitioner as grounds for refusal.
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 B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1941
Bail Appl..No. 1353 of 2019
CRIME NO. 121/2019 OF Tirur Police Station , Malappuram
PETITIONER/S:
1 SHAUKATHALI AGED 28 YEARS S/O ABOOBAKER, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.146, MOOSANTEPURAKKAL, MANGALAM PANCHAYATH, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 562.
2 RAFI
AGED 44 YEARS S/O ABOOBAKER, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.146, MOOSANTEPURAKKAL, MANGALAM PANCHAYATH, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 562.
3 MANAF AGED 40 YEARS HOUSE NO.146 (15/335), MOOSANTEPURAKKAL, MANGALAM PANCHAYATH, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 562.
BY ADVS. SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ SHRI.SUMEEN S. SRI.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.MUHAMMED FIRDOUSE SRI.N.KRISHNA PRASAD
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
Bail Appl..No. 1353 of 2019
-2-
2 ALIKUTTY AGED 42 YEARS S/O HUSSAINAR, JARAKADAVATHU HOUSE, P.O. KOOTTAYI, KOTHAPARAMBU DESAM, MANGALAM VILLAGE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 562.
BY ADVS. ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.C.K.SURESH,PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 1353 of 2019
-3-
ORDER
The petitioners are the accused in
Crime No.121/2019 of Tirur Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326 and 307 r/w Section 34 IPC.
2. The prosecution allegation is that the petitioners, in furtherance of their common intention, attacked the defacto complainant on 6.2.2019 at 11 a.m., and voluntarily caused hurt on him using dangerous weapons like sword.
3. The petitioners have filed application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has
submitted that the first and the second
Bail Appl..No. 1353 of 2019
-4-
petitioners had been already arrested and they are still in custody. The third petitioner is the third accused in the crime. He is involved in 14 other crimes of
grave nature. The 3rd petitioner was
convicted for seven years in Crime No.437/2016 under Section 307 IPC. He is also involved in another crime registered in the year 2018 for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. It appears that the
incident in this case was orchestrated by the 3rd petitioner. It appears that the 3rd petitioner is a habitual offender and also a convict. In the said circumstances, it is not safe to grant the relief under Section
438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the third
Bail Appl..No. 1353 of 2019
-5-
petitioner. The first and the second petitioners have been already arrested. In view of the above reasons, I am inclined to dismiss this application.
In the result, this application stands
dismissed.
Sd/-
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE
STK
//TRUE COPY//
//P.A. TO JUDGE//
2 issues framed by the court
Whether antecedent criminal convictions and alleged orchestration of the offence preclude grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether safety concerns regarding an apprehended habitual offender justify dismissal of bail application.
SHAUKATHALI
RAFI
MANAF
STATE OF KERALA
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
