Dismissed

Robin David v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Mar 2023Bail Appl./478/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a bail application for an accused found with a suspected illegal amount of ganja. The court noted the accused was already on parole for a murder conviction and had a history of committing crimes during parole, including another recent incident. Due to prima facie evidence of involvement and bad character, bail was denied.

What did the court decide?

The petition for regular bail is dismissed in accordance with the circumstances of the case.

Robin David Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN WEDNESDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 478 OF 2023

¶4

CRIME NO.134/2022 OF MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION

¶5

PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED:

¶6

ROBIN DAVID AGED 30 YEARS S/O DAVID V GEORGE, VARIKKOLETHU EBENEZAR VEEDU, KALLIMEL P.O, KALLIMEL MURI, VETTIYAR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690509

¶7

BY ADVS. P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE TONY THOMAS (INCHIPARAMBIL) E.S.FIROS AMRUTHA K.P. SRADHA MOHAN

¶8

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶9

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

¶10

BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P G MANU

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

BAIL APPL. NO. 478 OF 2023 2

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Dated this the 8^th day of March 2023

¶15

This is an application for regular bail, filed by the 1^st accused in Crime No.134/2022 of Mavelikkara Police Station, where the accused alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS' hereinafter).

¶16

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

¶17

I have perused the petition averments as well as the case diary in detail, along with the manner, in which, this crime was

¶18

committed, with reference to his antecedents.

¶19

The case of the prosecution is that, the accused herein possessed 1.175 kg of Ganja at their residential house and the same was recovered on 28.2.2022. Pursuant to recovery, crime, alleging commission of the above offence was registered.

¶20

While pressing for regular bail to the petitioner, in a case

¶21

BAIL APPL. NO. 478 OF 2023 3

¶22

involving intermediate quantity, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been undergoing sentence in a murder case and his detention in this crime, without granting bail, would prejudice his right to get parole. Therefore, taking note of his custody, he may be released on bail.

¶23

Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed bail and submitted the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, inclusive of the fact that this crime also was committed during parole. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that, this is the second crime committed by the petitioner during parole, while he had been undergoing sentence for the offence of murder imposed by the Sessions Court, Mavelikkara in S.C.No.633/2015. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that, in the year 2012, the petitioner involved in Crime No.1022/2012 of Mavelikkara Police Station and in the said crime, though the offence alleged was under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code, he was acquitted. But, S.C.No.633/2015, arising out of Crime No.540/2015, he was convicted and sentenced. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted

¶24

BAIL APPL. NO. 478 OF 2023 4

¶25

further that, the petitioner has no respect to law. Though he had been undergoing imprisonment in a murder case, when he was released on parole, he had involved in Crime No.754/2021, where the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code. Now, the matter has been pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-1, Mavelikkara, as C.C.No.372/2021. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner, who has been repeatedly involving in crimes, that too, during the period of parole, cannot be released on bail. If so, the same would be fatal to the society, at large.

¶26

On perusal of the available records on par with the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, it is discernible that, 1.175 kgs of Ganja was seized from the residential house of the petitioner and the same was seized and the petitioner was arrested. It is shocking to note that this crime was committed, while the petitioner was on parole, while undergoing life imprisonment along with sentence to pay Rs.5,00,000/(Rupees Five Lakh only), as fine in

¶27

BAIL APPL. NO. 478 OF 2023 5

¶28

S.C.No.633/2015. Thus, red-handed recovery would go to show

¶29

prima facie that the petitioner has involvement in this crime and

¶30

there is no reason to see that he is innocent of the allegations. It is shocking to note further that he had involved in Crime No.754/2021 herein above referred, when he was released on parole, prior to this occurrence. Altogether, this is the 4^th crime against the petitioner and he has been enjoying the benefit of parole also, to commit offences inclusive of serious nature, warranting serious punishment. The attitude of the petitioner would go to show that he deserves no leniency and therefore, this petition can only be dismissed.

¶31

Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.

¶32

Registry is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Deputy Inspector General of the Jail and the Superintendent of the Jail, where the petitioner has been undergoing sentence, for information and further action, in accordance with law, within ten days.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶35

Robin David v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Robin David 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

Praveen B Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Akbar M. a. @ Akku Vs the Station House Officer

Vishnu Nair @ Kannan Vs State of Kerala

Ambaji.T.R Vs State of Kerala

Hashim Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Hakeem Vs State of Kerala