Binu Devassia Vs. State of Kerala

Binu Devassia vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 29, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1013386

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1013386
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan
Decided On: Jan 29, 2013
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Binu Devassia

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....b.a. no.456 of 2013 --------------------------------------------- dated this the 29th day of january, 2013 order the petitioner is the first accused in crime no.856/2012 of kuravilangadu police station, who is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under section 452, 323, 308, 427, 506(ii) and 34 of ipc.2. allegation against the petitioner is that he along with co-accused trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked him using a chopper and caused injuries to him.3. the petitioner would say that the allegations are totally false and cooked up for the purpose of the case. the petitioner would admit that there was a scuffle between him and the de facto complainant. but he denies of having used any weapon. according to him, the de facto complainant might have suffered injuries in the scuffle.4. learned public prosecutor opposed the petition. according to him, the petitioner is alleged to have used weapons and the de facto complainant has suffered serious injury. it is further pointed out by him that the investigation is at an b.a.no.456/2013 :2: infant stage.5. after having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor and after having perused the records, the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent cannot be accepted as of now. at any rate, there are evidence and materials to show that the petitioner had attacked the de facto complainant and the de facto complainant suffered injuries also. considering the nature of allegations, the manner in which the offence was committed, weapons used, injuries suffered and also the fact that the investigation is at an infant stage, preclude this court from exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. the petition is accordingly dismissed. p.bhavadasan, judge. okb.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 9TH MAGHA 193 Bail Appl..No. 456 of 2013 () ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 856/2012 OF KURAVILANGADU POLICE STATION , KOTTAYAM DIST. ............. PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: ------------------------------------------- BINU DEVASIA, S/O.P.U. DEVASIA, AGED 2 YEARS, PANACHEL HOUSE, KANAKKARY P.O., ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.V.S. SREEJITH. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.BHAVADASAN, J.

--------------------------------------------- B.A. No.456 of 2013 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013 ORDER The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.856/2012 of Kuravilangadu Police Station, who is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Section 452, 323, 308, 427, 506(ii) and 34 of IPC.

2. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with co-accused trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and attacked him using a chopper and caused injuries to him.

3. The petitioner would say that the allegations are totally false and cooked up for the purpose of the case. The petitioner would admit that there was a scuffle between him and the de facto complainant. But he denies of having used any weapon. According to him, the de facto complainant might have suffered injuries in the scuffle.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition. According to him, the petitioner is alleged to have used weapons and the de facto complainant has suffered serious injury. It is further pointed out by him that the investigation is at an B.A.No.456/2013 :2: infant stage.

5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and after having perused the records, the claim of the petitioner that he is innocent cannot be accepted as of now. At any rate, there are evidence and materials to show that the petitioner had attacked the de facto complainant and the de facto complainant suffered injuries also. Considering the nature of allegations, the manner in which the offence was committed, weapons used, injuries suffered and also the fact that the investigation is at an infant stage, preclude this Court from exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner. The petition is accordingly dismissed. P.BHAVADASAN, Judge. okb.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2013 Same Parties Binu Devassia vs State of Kerala Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice P.Bhavadasan