Skip to content
Try for free
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.
See full guide →

Unnimaya vs State of Kerala

Unnimaya vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided May 22, 2024
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1323971

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

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

Citation
Court
Kerala Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./3376/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Unnimaya

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....- 683519 by adv v.visal ajayan respondent/state/complainant: state of kerala represented by public prosecutor, high court of kerala, pin - 682031 by smt shynimol. v.o public prosecutor this bail application having come up for admission on 22.05.2024, the court on the same day delivered the following: -:2:-orderdated this the 22nd day of may, 2024 the application is filed under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, for an order of pre-arrest bail.2. the petitioner apprehends arrest by the ernakulam south police station, ernakulam, in an unknown crime for allegedly committing the offences punishable under sections 406 and 420 of the indian penal code.3. heard; sri. v.visal ajayan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and smt. shynimol. v.o, the learned public prosecutor.4. the learned public prosecutor, on instructions,submits that the petitioner is the second accused in crime no.512/2024 of the ernakulam south police station, ernakulam, registered against the accused (two in number) for allegedly committing the offences under -:3:- sections 420 and 406 of the indian penal code.5. on a reading of the bail application none of thedetails pertaining to the incident, crime number or the offences have been mentioned. the bail application is vague and lacks the requisite details, particularly the accusations levelled against the petitioner. therefore, in view of the conspicuous absence of the elementary details, i hold that the application is not sustainable, and the petitioner may to file a fresh application after incorporating all the requisite details.in the result, the bail application is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a fresh bail application after incorporating his rank, crime number, the offences and also the specific accusations levelled against him. sd/- c.s.dias,judge mtk/22.05.24

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2024 / 1ST JYAISHTA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 3376 OF 2024 CRIME NO.0/0 OF ERNAKULAM SOUTH POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: UNNIMAYA AGED 28 YEARS S/O SHINOY KS, , KANIYATH HOUSE, KAITHARAM P.O, NORTH PARAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683519 BY ADV V.VISAL AJAYAN RESPONDENT/STATE/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY SMT SHYNIMOL. V.O PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -:2:-

ORDER

Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2024 The application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for an order of pre-arrest bail.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest by the Ernakulam South Police Station, Ernakulam, in an unknown crime for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Heard; Sri. V.Visal Ajayan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Shynimol. V.O, the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,

submits that the petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.512/2024 of the Ernakulam South Police Station, Ernakulam, registered against the accused (two in number) for allegedly committing the offences under -:3:- Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. On a reading of the bail application none of the

details pertaining to the incident, crime number or the offences have been mentioned. The bail application is vague and lacks the requisite details, particularly the accusations levelled against the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the conspicuous absence of the elementary details, I hold that the application is not sustainable, and the petitioner may to file a fresh application after incorporating all the requisite details.

In the result, the bail application is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to file a fresh bail application after incorporating his rank, crime number, the offences and also the specific accusations levelled against him. Sd/- C.S.DIAS,JUDGE mtk/22.05.24

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2024 Same Parties Unnimaya vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales