Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE24H DAYOF JANUARY20144TH MAGHA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 483 of 2014 ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 71/2014 OF CHENGAMANAD POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- SREEHARI, AGED24YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAKUMAR, PARATTU HOUSE, KIZHAKKE DESOM, CHENGAMMANAD VILLAGE, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHENGAMANAD POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.RASHEED THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2401-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYPASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.BHAVADASAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 483 of 2014 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of January, 2014 ORDER
The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No. 71 of 2014 of Chengamanad Police Station who is alleged to have committed the offences punishable under Sections 354(A) (D), 294(b), 506(i) and 500 of IPC.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, on 11.01.2014 at about 6.00 p.m., trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and exhibited his private parts to a lady.
3. The petitioner would say that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated at the behest of a Panchayat member who is on inimical term towards him. For the above submissions, the petitioner relies on various documents produced with this petition and especially on Annexure A6, which according to the petitioner, shows that there was an attempt to outrage the modesty of his sister by the said person and some other goondas. As a retaliatory measure, B.A. No.483/2014 -2- the said person has caused the present complaint with false allegations. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and pointed out that the petitioner is not as innocent as he pretends to be and he is a nuisance of the locality. He has got criminal antecedents and proceedings under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. is pending against him. It is also pointed out that the investigation is at an infant stage.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and having perused the records, the claim of the petitioner that he is totally innocent cannot be countenanced. It is difficult to believe from the available records that the present crime has been registered as a retaliatory measure to Annexure A6 complaint. There is nothing to show that the victim of the present crime has anything to do with the said Panchayat Member. It is also difficult to believe that the people of the locality would readily oblige the Panchayat member and B.A. No.483/2014 -3- raising false allegations against the petitioner. Further, going by the CD, it is seen that the petitioner has criminal antecedents also. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration, it is felt that this is not a fit case where extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court needs to be exercised in favour of the petitioner. The petition is accordingly dismissed. However, if so advised, the petitioner may surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 31.01.2014, who after interrogation, shall produce him before the JFCM Court concerned. If the petitioner moves an application for bail before the said court, the learned Magistrate shall consider and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law, preferably on the date of surrender itself. P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE ds