Allowed

Anshif Ashraf v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Jan 2022Bail Appl./13/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application for anticipatory bail in a motor-vehicle accident case where the accused, a 20-year-old student, was charged with culpable homicide and rash driving. The court granted bail subject to conditions including surrendering the driving license and not driving for six months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on anticipatory bail subject to executing a bond, appearing weekly, surrendering driving license, and not driving for six months.

Anshif Ashraf Vs State of Kerala — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

B.A.No.13/2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶6

MONDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 13 OF 2022

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

ANSHIF ASHRAF,AGED 20 YEARS S/O.ASHRAF, KOTTARAMPATTAYIL HOUSE, PUNNAYURKULAM,CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT,THRISSUR, PIN-679 561

¶9

BY ADV RAJIT

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI. M.C. ASHI (SR.PP)

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.13/2022

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶19

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Sation, Thrissur District alleging commission of offences under Sections 304 & 279 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 184(iv)(d) (f) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶20

The allegation against the petitioner is that on 1.1.2022 at 10.30 a.m., the petitioner drove his motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-08-BS4985 in a rash and negligent manner and thereby collided with a scooter being driven by one Rajan, who sustained serious injuries and thereafter succumbed to the same.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only nonbailable offence alleged against the petitioner is that under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that, at any rate, the offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code is not attracted. Reference is made to the definition of culpable homicide in Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code to point out that a culpable homicide can be committed only by a person who does any act with the intention of causing death or with the intention of causing bodily injury as is likely to cause death or a person who knows that his act is likely to cause death of any other person. It is submitted that, at best, the petitioner could be an accused of having committed an offence under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code and not of an offence under Section 304 of the

B.A.No.13/2022

Indian Penal Code.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

¶26

The learned Public Prosecutor with reference to scene mahazar in respect of Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station would contend that the petitioner was clearly the guilty of the offences alleged against him. It is submitted that the deceased Rajan was a 72 year old man, who was riding his scooter barely one meter from the road boundary on a National Highway and the petitioner had rashly and negligently driven his bike and had rammed it against the scooter from behind causing serious injuries to the above said Rajan, who succumbed to his injuries almost immediately. It is submitted that CCTV footage collected by the prosecution shows the rash and negligent manner in which the petitioner was riding his bike. It is also pointed out that the latter part of Section 299 of the IPC, which deals with knowledge that a particular act may lead to death of another is clearly attracted and the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code is not attracted cannot be accepted at all.

¶27

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and especially considering the fact that the petitioner is a 20 year old student and considering the fact that the custody of the petitioner may not be required for a proper investigation into Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions.

¶28

In the result, this application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in

¶29

B.A.No.13/2022

¶30

¶31

Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station subject to the following conditions:-

¶32

(i) Petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

¶33

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station at 11 a.m., on every Saturday till filing of a final report;

¶34

(iii) Petitioner shall surrender his driving licence before the investigating officer and shall not be permitted to drive any motor vehicle for a period of six months from today;

¶35

(iv) Petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

¶36

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating officer in Crime No.4/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.

¶37

sd/-

¶38

GOPINATH P. JUDGE

¶39

acd

Anshif Ashraf v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anshif Ashraf 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

Saidu Mohammed.a., Vs State of Kerala

Dipin Kumar R Vs State of Kerala

Shinu Shaji @ Ambadi Vs State of Kerala

Abijith Vs State of Kerala

Maneesh Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh A.P. Vs State of Kerala