The High Court of Kerala dismissed a second application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The court held that without a change in the fact situation or law since the dismissal of the earlier application, the filing of a second application is not maintainable.
The second application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.
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 R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
FRIDAY ,THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 709 of 2019
CRIME NO. 546/2018 OF Pulikeezhu Police Station , Pathanamthitta
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
SANTHOSH KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS
S/O.PURUSHOTHAMAN PILLAI, SARADA NILAYAM, PODIYADI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN- 689110.
BY ADV. SRI.SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682031.
2 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PULIKEEZHU POLICE STATION, PULIKEEZHU, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT- 689645.
SRI.B.JAYASURYA SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 709 of 2019
2
O R D E R
This second application for anticipatory bail is filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Bail Appl..No. 709 of 2019
3
cannot be entertained (See Vineeth v. State of Kerala: 2015 (5)
KHC 224 and Pandi v. State of Kerala : 2018(4) KHC 782 ).
that there has been any change in the fact situation of the case or law since the dismissal of the earlier application for anticipatory bail filed by him. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-R. NARAYANA PISHARADI
JUDGE
lsn
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a second application for anticipatory bail can be entertained when there is no change in fact situation or law.
Whether the petitioner satisfied the court that there has been a change in fact situation since the dismissal of the earlier application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vineeth v. State of KeralaReferred¶27
Vineeth v. State of Kerala: 2015 (5) KHC 224
Pandi v. State of KeralaReferred¶27
Pandi v. State of Kerala : 2018(4) KHC 782
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Santhosh Kumar
State of Kerala
R. Narayana Pisharadi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
