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.

Sabu vs State of Kerala

SABU vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jun 30, 2023
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1368501

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./4909/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SABU

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....are accused 1 to 3 in crime no.819 of 2023of kadakkal police station, kollam, alleging offences punishable under sections 341, 294(b), 506, 323 and 324 read with section 34 of the indian penal code, 1860.3. according to the prosecution, when the defactocomplainant questioned the accused for consuming alcohol in front of his house and abusing him, the accused had with intent to inflict serious injuries on him, on 05.05.2023, abused him and brutally assaulted the defacto complainant with a wooden stick on his face and thereafter, hit him with a reaper and also kicked him and inflicting severe injuries and the accused thus committed the offences alleged.4. sri.k.v.anil kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that the prosecution allegations are false and the b.a.no.4909/2023 3 incident as alleged had not occurred. it was further pointed out that though the incident is alleged to have occurred on 05.05.2023, the fir was registered only on 10.05.2023 and therefore, the prosecution case itself is false.5. smt.v.sreeja, learned public prosecutor, opposed the application and submitted that subsequent to the registration of the crime, the offence under section 326 ipc has also been added sincemedical examination revealed that the defacto complainant sustained a fracture. it was also pointed out that the accused had assaulted the defacto complainant since he questioned the conduct of the accused in consuming alcohol in front of his house.6. i have heard the rival contentions.7. petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the defactocomplainant using a wooden stick and a reaper. the defacto complainant sustained several injuries including a fracture of the mandible. this is evident from the wound certificate dated 06.05.2023 which is the next day itself. the wound certificate also refers to the history of assault by named persons therein. considering the aforesaid circumstances, i am of the view that mere delay in registering the fir cannot, at this juncture,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 9TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 4909 OF 2023 CRIME NO.819/2023 OF KADAKKAL POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3: 1 SABU AGED 39 YEARS, S/O SASI, SABU VILASOM, KEERIPURAM, KADAKAL, 2 THULASI @ KUTTAN AGED 42 YEARS, S/O KOCHUCHERUKKAN, MANICHI BHAVAN, PALONAM, KADAKAL, 3 SHARON AGED 43 YEARS S/O MURALEEDHARAN PILLAI, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, ATTUPURAM, KADAKAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691536 BY ADVS. K.V.ANIL KUMAR SWAPNA VIJAYAN RADHIKA S.ANIL RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV.SMT.V.SREEJA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A.No.4909/2023 2

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

B.A.No.4909 of 2023 Dated this the 30th day of June, 2023

ORDER

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking pre-arrest bail.

2. Petitioners are accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.819 of 2023

of Kadakkal Police Station, Kollam, alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 506, 323 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. According to the prosecution, when the defacto

complainant questioned the accused for consuming alcohol in front of his house and abusing him, the accused had with intent to inflict serious injuries on him, on 05.05.2023, abused him and brutally assaulted the defacto complainant with a wooden stick on his face and thereafter, hit him with a reaper and also kicked him and inflicting severe injuries and the accused thus committed the offences alleged.

4. Sri.K.V.Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that the prosecution allegations are false and the B.A.No.4909/2023 3 incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further pointed out that though the incident is alleged to have occurred on 05.05.2023, the FIR was registered only on 10.05.2023 and therefore, the prosecution case itself is false.

5. Smt.V.Sreeja, learned Public Prosecutor, opposed the application and submitted that subsequent to the registration of the crime, the offence under Section 326 IPC has also been added since

medical examination revealed that the defacto complainant sustained a fracture. It was also pointed out that the accused had assaulted the defacto complainant since he questioned the conduct of the accused in consuming alcohol in front of his house.

6. I have heard the rival contentions.

7. Petitioners are alleged to have assaulted the defacto

complainant using a wooden stick and a reaper. The defacto complainant sustained several injuries including a fracture of the mandible. This is evident from the wound certificate dated 06.05.2023 which is the next day itself. The wound certificate also refers to the history of assault by named persons therein. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that mere delay in registering the FIR cannot, at this juncture, enure any benefit to the petitioners.

B.A.No.4909/2023 4

8. Considering the nature of allegations and also the nature

of injuries sustained by the defacto complainant, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where petitioners could be protected with an order of anticipatory bail.

9. However, if the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer on or before 07.07.2023, they shall be

subjected to interrogation and thereafter, in the event of their arrest, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Further in the event of any application for bail being filed by the petitioners, the same shall be considered by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law without delay. Bail Application is dismissed as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE csl

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial