This criminal appeal by accused Santosh challenged the Sessions Judge's order dismissing his bail application. The High Court noted the appellant had committed new crimes and threatened the victim after previous bail, upholding the rejection of his bail plea.
The Criminal Appeal was dismissed, and the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial.
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 K. BABU
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1945
CRL.A NO. 218 OF 2024
CRIME NO.547/2022 OF Koraty Police Station, Thrissur
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN SC NO.1015 OF 2022 OF THE SPECIAL
COURT FOR SC/ST(POA) ACT CASES, THRISSUR
APPELLANT:
SANTHOSH
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. CHANDRAN, KUZUPPILLY HOUSE,
MURINGOOR, ATTAPADAM DESOM, KORATTY,
THEKKUMMURI VILLAGE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680308
BY ADVS.
K.RAJESWARY
ANIL PRABHA.K
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 6820312 PRADEEPKUMAR, AGED 53 YEARS KADUNAVAYALIL HOUSE, ANNANAD DESOM, KADUKUTTY VILLAGE, KERALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 388001R1 BY SRI.G.SUDHEER-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
K.BABU, J
Crl.A No.218 of 2024
Dated this the 11th day of March, 2024
This is an appeal filed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
of the Special Court for SC/ST (POA) Act Cases, Thrissur. The appellant is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326, 307, 506(ii) and 427 r/w Section 34 of IPC, Section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 92(b) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
bail to the appellant on conditions. After his release, the appellant got involved in another crime.
Crl.A No.218 of 2024
3
from custody under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the application as per order dated 27.11.2023. This order is under challenge in this appeal.
further detention of the appellant is not required and that he is prepared to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court.
there is every possibility that he will threaten the victim and other witnesses.
“1. The petitioner will execute bond for Rs.25,000/with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.
Crl.A No.218 of 2024
4
witnesses for the prosecution and will not in any way interfere in the course of trial.
No.239/2023 wherein the offences alleged are punishable under Sections 429 and 447 of IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 11(1)(i) of Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act.
“4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor vehementaly opposed this application. The Investigating Officer filed report stating that the petitioner has violated the bail condition imposed by the Sessions Court and accordingly the bail was cancelled. There was a specific condition in the bail order not to involve any other crimes. However violating the bail condition the petitioner has committed two more grave crimes. Accordingly the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The report of the Investigating Officer reveal that apart from these three crimes the petitioner was accused in 14 other crimes and as the petitioner is a habitual offender and causing lots of law and order issues in the locality proceedings under KAAPA
Crl.A No.218 of 2024
5
was initiated against the petitioner. Therefore, the Investigating Officer vehementaly opposed the bail application.”
crimes and he is a habitual offender. Proceedings under KAAPA have also been initiated against him.
would show that the release of the appellant on bail would be a threat
to the life of the victim.
Having considered the entire circumstances, I am of the view that
the appellant is not entitled to be released on bail. Therefore, the Crl.Appeal stands dismissed. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the
trial.
Sd/-
K.BABU JUDGE
ab
Crl.A No.218 of 2024
6
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 218/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO. 547/2022 OF KORATTY POLICE STATION
DATED 5/8/2022
Annexure 2TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P.NO.
2524/2022 DATED 24/08/2022
Annexure 3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF HONOURABLE JFCM
CHALAKUDY IN CRL.M.P.NO.1644 OF 2023
DATED 3/04/2023
Annexure 4FREE COPY OF THE CANCELLATION OF THE
ANNEXURE-2 BAIL ORDER IN CRL.M . P. NO.
2076/2023 DATED 24/07/2023
Annexure 5TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M,P.467/2023
IN S .C.1015 /2022 OF SPECIAL COURT SC/ST
ACT CASES TRISSUR DATED 27/11/2023
RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant, a habitual offender who was involved in additional crimes after obtaining bail, is entitled to be released on regular bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SANTHOSH
THE STATE OF KERALA
PRADEEPKUMAR
K. BABU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court