Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Anshif Vs. the State of Kerala

Anshif vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 16, 2014
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1152346

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anshif

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....these accused trespassed into the class room, abused the teacher and obstructed him from discharging official duty. it is also submitted that the first accused is involved in three other crimes while accused nos.2, 3 and 5 are involved in one crime each. the 4th accused is involved in two crimes.3. learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true and the attempt is to suppress the illegal activities in the college.4. in the circumstances above stated, i am not inclined to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction under sec.438 of the code of criminal procedure but i am inclined to issue directions. resultantly this application is disposed of as under: (i) petitioners shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.411 of 2014 of the alathur police station on 25.06.2014 at 10 a.m for b.a.no.3235 of 2014 2 interrogation. (ii) in case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioners on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioners shall comply. (iii) in case arrest of the petitioners is recorded, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (iv) on such production it is open to the petitioners to request for bail with intimation given to the assistant public prosecutor concerned atleast two working days in advance. (v) in case custody of the petitioners is required, it is open to the investigating officer to move application before the learned magistrate. (vi) learned magistrate shall consider the application(s) on merit having regard to all relevant circumstances including whether detention of the petitioners or any of them is required for recovery of any material object and pass appropriate orders as early as possible. sd/- thomas p.joseph, judge. sbna true copy p a to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE16H DAY OF JUNE201426TH JYAISHTA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 3235 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 411/2014 OF ALATHUR POLICE STATION , PALAKKAD PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED1TO5 ----------------------------- 1. ANSHIF AGED21YEARS S/O.KOJA MOIDEEN, RESIDING AT ANSHIF MANZIL NORTH STREET, KUNISSERY, PALAKKAD.

2. MIDHUNRAJ AGED21YEARS S/O.RAJAN, RESIDING AT ALIYAKUNNU HOUSE, VENGANNUR ALATHUR PALAKKAD.

3. VIPIN AGED21YEARS S/O.KANNAN, VALAYIL VEEDU, VADAKKENCHERRY MANJHAPRA, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.

4. DANESH AGED22YEARS S/O.MANIKKAN, MADHAVI NIVAS, ALUMPARAMBIL CHERAMANGALAM, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD.

5. PRAVEEN AGED22YEARS S/O.VELU, RESIDING AT VALAYIL VEEDU, MANJHAPRA VADAKKENHERRY, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT/STATE OF KERALA: -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ALATHUR POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV. LALIZA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON16 06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

========================= B.A.No.3235 of 2014 ============================ Dated this the 16th day of June, 2014 ORDER

Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 5 in Crime No.411 of 2014 of the Alathur Police Station for the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 294(b), 341, 353 and 448 r/w Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that on 13.03.2014 these accused trespassed into the class room, abused the teacher and obstructed him from discharging official duty. It is also submitted that the first accused is involved in three other crimes while accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 are involved in one crime each. The 4th accused is involved in two crimes.

3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true and the attempt is to suppress the illegal activities in the college.

4. In the circumstances above stated, I am not inclined to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Sec.438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but I am inclined to issue directions. Resultantly this application is disposed of as under: (i) Petitioners shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.411 of 2014 of the Alathur Police Station on 25.06.2014 at 10 a.m for B.A.No.3235 of 2014 2 interrogation. (ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioners on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioners shall comply. (iii) In case arrest of the petitioners is recorded, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (iv) On such production it is open to the petitioners to request for bail with intimation given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor concerned atleast two working days in advance. (v) In case custody of the petitioners is required, it is open to the Investigating Officer to move application before the learned magistrate. (vi) Learned magistrate shall consider the application(s) on merit having regard to all relevant circumstances including whether detention of the petitioners or any of them is required for recovery of any material object and pass appropriate orders as early as possible. Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. Sbna True Copy P A to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial