Dismissed

Siddhik Pallath v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Oct 2019Bail Appl./6930/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by six accused persons charged with offences of degree of assembly, voluntarily causing hurt, mischief, and extortion. Relying on medical evidence of injury and damage to property, the court found no reason to grant bail and directed immediate surrender.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; applicants directed to surrender before Investigating officer forthwith.

Siddhik Pallath Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 26TH ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.6930 OF 2019

¶6

CRIME NO.306/2019 OF CHALISSERY POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 SIDDHIK PALLATH AGED 40 YEARS S/O. MOHAMMED, PALLATH HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶9

2 SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 30 YEARS S/O. MOHAMMED, KURUPPANTHODIYIL HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶10

3 JAMSHEER, AGED 25 YEARS S/O. ABDUL RAZZACK, KULATHUMPADY HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶11

4 SAFFIR, AGED 28 YEARS S/O. KUTTUMOOSA, PALLATH HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5 NOORUL HASSAN, AGED 29 YEARS S/O. ALI, PALLATH HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶12

6 MAZOOR, AGED 29 YEARS S/O. MOHAMMED, KULATHUMPADY HOUSE, THIRUMITTAKKODE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶14

RESPONDENT/S:

¶15

Bail Appl..No.6930 OF 2019

¶16

..2..

¶17

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

¶18

OTHER PRESENT:

¶19

SRI B JAYASURYA SR PP

¶20

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

..3..

¶22

Bail Appl..No.6930 OF 2019

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

The applicants herein are the accused Nos. 1 to 6 in Crime No. 306 of 2019 of the Chalisserry Police Station registered on 16.09.2019 under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 427 & 392 r/w. Section 149 of the IPC.

¶26

The prosecution allegation as per the records made available is that on 16.09.2019 at 12.15 pm, the accused Nos. 1 to 6 formed an unlawful assembly and invited the de facto complainant to come to the residence of the 1^st accused promising that the wages due to him will be disbursed. The de facto complainant along with his friend went to the house. It is alleged that the accused came in a tipper lorry and dashed on the car. Thereafter, the informant was pulled out and the 1^st accused is alleged to have inflicted injuries with an iron rod. One of the other accused is alleged to have inflicted injuries with a stick. Rest of the accused kicked and stamped him and caused injuries. It is also alleged that the friend of the informant, Sri.Ashique, was also inflicted with injuries by the accused. It is further alleged that serious damage was caused to the car bearing Reg.No.KL-46-F-7127 and the mobile phones and purse of the informant and his friend were robbed.

¶27

Bail Appl..No.6930 OF 2019

¶28

..4..

¶29

Sri.Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel appearing for the applicants, submitted that there is no truth in the allegations. According to the learned counsel, the 1^st accused was working abroad and during this period, the informant trespassed into the house and sexually abused his wife under threat. Later, she was threatened that her explicit photographs would be made public. When the 1^st applicant came from overseas, he noticed the indifferent behaviour of his wife and when she was questioned, she divulged about the wrongful acts of the informant. Based on the information furnished by the lady, Crime No.309 of 2019 was registered inter alia under Section 376 of the IPC. According to the learned counsel, the sequence of events would show that the true facts have not been placed by the informant.

¶30

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor, who opposed the prayer. Referring to the wound certificate dated 15.09.2019, it is submitted that the informant was treated in the Medical College Hospital, Thrissur and the doctor has noted that he had suffered a fracture on the lateral wall of the maxillary sinus. It is further submitted that no reliance can be placed on Annexure-A as it is evident that the crime was registered belatedly on 17.09.2019 to set up a defence.

¶31

I have considered the submissions advanced and have perused the records. On going through the medical certificate, I find that the victim had suffered a fracture at the hands of the accused. The contemporaneous

¶32

Bail Appl..No.6930 OF 2019

¶33

..5..

¶34

mahazar shows that extensive damages were caused to the Maruti Ritz car bearing Reg.KL-46-F-7127. Serious acts of violence were perpetrated by the accused. Having gone through the records, I find no reason to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the applicants. I direct the applicants to surrender before

¶35

the Investigating officer forthwith. Bail application, if any, filed before the jurisdictional court, shall be considered on its merits.

¶36

This application is dismissed.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶39

JUDGE

¶40

Bka/19.10.2019

Siddhik Pallath v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddhik Pallath 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

Muhamedali.K Vs the State of Kerala

Nandu Vs the Sub Inspector of Poli Ce

Praful Vs State of Kerala

Haneesha Noufal, Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Vs the State of Kerala

Safras, Vs State of Kerala