Bail application dismissed as the High Court refused pre-arrest bail to the petitioner accused of theft, noting prior criminal involvement and contact with the confederate on the incident date.
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 SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 19TH MAGHA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 318 of 2019
CRIME NO.1571/2018 OF KALADY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.2:
VARGHESE
AGED 57 YEARS S/O. JOSEPH, NADUVEETTIL (HOUSE), ROSE GARDEN, KOZHUKKULLY POST, THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON VARIKKAPPALLIL
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
SRI. AJITH MURALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 318 of 2019
2
O R D E R
Petitioner herein, apprehending arrest in Crime
No.1571/2018 of Kalady Police Station, Ernakulam, as 2nd
accused for offences punishable under Sections 379 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, seeks bail.
2.The crux of the prosecution allegation is that the
defacto complainant was traveling in a bus with cash of
Rs.1,00,000/-. When the bus reached Mekkalady, he had a
doubt that his money was stolen by somebody. He got down
at the bus stop, verified the money and found that the money
was lost. He immediately conveyed it to the persons in the
bus and the vehicle was taken to the police station. The 1st
accused could not properly answer the questions put. Hence
he was intercepted and he was arrested. He allegedly
confessed about the complicity of the petitioner herein and
that the money was handed over to the petitioner.
3.It was contented by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that, he is absolutely innocent of the crime that he
has not traveled in the bus on that day and he is sought to be
3
Bail Appl..No. 318 of 2019
wrongly implicated for the reason that he was earlier
implicated in a crime along with the 1st accused.
4.The materials furnished by the prosecution indicate
that the petitioner is involved in six other crimes of different
police stations including one crime in Kalady Police Station
itself. Among the six crimes, four crimes are under Section
379 IPC. It seems that though he belongs to Thrissur, he is
involved in crimes at Vadakkancherry, Irinjalalakkuda,
Thrissur West, Peechy, Alathur and Kalady. It is also brought
on record that the petitioner had contacted the 1st accused on
the date of incident.
Considering these inputs, I am not inclined to grant the
benefit of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Bail application
fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
JUDGE
DK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the accused apprehending arrest in the offence of theft.
VARGHESE
STATE OF KERALA
SUNIL THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court