Disposed

Antony Paul v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Sept 2021Bail Appl./3574/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC regarding an IPC 324/326/34 charge, the Kerala High Court directed the petitioner to surrender to the investigating officer, after which bail would be considered on the same day.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender before investigating officer on 09.09.2021 at 10.30 a.m.; bail to be considered post-arrest on same day.

Antony Paul Vs State of Kerala — Cheating and Forgery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 15TH BHADRA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 3574 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.262/2021 OF KOIPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

ANTONY PAUL AGED 34 YEARS POOVARISHMOOTTIL HOUSE, KAVIYOOR PO., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689582

¶9

BY ADV SUNIL JACOB JOSE

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

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

¶12

SREEJA.V- SR.P.P

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

BAIL APPL. NO. 3574 OF 2021

¶15

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.262/2021 of Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 326 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, this petitioner, who is arraigned as the 3^rd accused has moved this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

The prosecution case in brief is as follows:

¶19

On 12.03.2021 at about 9.15 p.m, the petitioner along

¶20

with the other accused had attacked the defacto complainant, who is a BJP worker due to their political animosity towards him. The 1^st accused had used a sword, the 2^nd and the 3^rd accused had beaten him with an iron rod causing injuries including fracture to his knee and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this petitioner has absolutely no connection or contact with the defacto complainant and he is residing far away from the place of occurrence. He is also not having any political enmity towards the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant as well as the other accused are total strangers to him. But, still he has been

¶22

BAIL APPL. NO. 3574 OF 2021

¶23

¶24

implicated in this case as the 3^rd accused. In fact, he is a diver by profession and he has no connection whatsoever with the alleged incident. In fact, in the FI statement also the defacto complainant has not made any reference about this petitioner, even then he apprehends arrest as the case has been registered against him.

¶25

The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that, though the name of this petitioner has not been mentioned by the defacto complainant to the police, on investigation it was revealed that this petitioner has used an iron rod to inflict injuries including fracture to the defacto complainant and the weapon used by him as well the 2^nd accused had already been recovered from a place near the residential house of this petitioner. So the complicity of this petitioner in causing grievous injuries to the defacto complainant is quite evident from the records as such available before the investigating officer. But it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that, he is having no criminal antecedents.

¶26

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶27

Accused Nos.1 and 2 had already been arrested and they were granted regular bail. The weapon alleged to have been used

¶28

BAIL APPL. NO. 3574 OF 2021

¶29

¶30

by this petitioner has also been recovered at the instance of the 2^nd accused. The materials so far collected by the investigating agency would show that the investigation of the case has progressed considerably. This petitioner is also having no criminal antecedents and taking into consideration of all these facts, I think that this petition can be disposed of directing this petitioner to surrender before the investigating officer on 09.09.2021 at 10.30 a.m. Upon his surrender, after recording his arrest and interrogation he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the very same day and if an application for bail is moved by this petitioner, the same shall be considered and disposed of on the very same day.

¶31

With these observations this application is disposed of.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

mpm

Antony Paul v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Antony Paul 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

Libinlinson Vs State of Kerala

Faizal Vs State of Kerala

Sharafudheen Vs the State of Kerala

Sojan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs the State of Kerala

Jijoy A.K. Vs State of Kerala