Arun vs State of Kerala

ARUN vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Sep 01, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1383423

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/1383423
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath
Decided On: Sep 01, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./7178/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

ARUN

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....seeking regular bail.2. the applicant is the accused no.3 in crime no.542 /2023 of nedupuzha police station. the offences alleged are punishable under sections 341, 323, 324, 506(i), 394 and 365 r/w 34 of ipc.3. the prosecution case, in short, is that on 17.07.2023 at07.45 p.m., the applicant along with the remaining accused abducted the de facto complainant in a car and criminally intimidated him by saying that they would kill him. further, the accused manhandled the de facto complainant, hit on his head using a chair, committed robbery of his motorcycle, snatched rs.1,500/- from him and thereby committed the above said offences.4. i have heard sri.p.mohamed sabah , the learned counsel for the applicant and sri.sangeetha raj, the learned public prosecutor. perused the case diary.5. the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. the counsel further submitted that no materials are on record toconnect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. on the other hand, the learned public prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.6. the applicant was remanded to judicial custody on06.08.2023. moreover, the applicant is a habitual offender. he is involved in 6 other crimes. a perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. considering the nature of the crime, how the petitioner is alleged to have complicity in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, i am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. the bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.sd/- dr.kauser edappagath, judge as

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 10TH BHADRA, 1945 CRIME NO. 542 OF 2023 NEDUPUZHA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 ARUN, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O MOHANAN, KAIKKINI HOUSE, KANIMANGALAM, PUTHUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680014 BY ADVS. P.MOHAMED SABAH LIBIN STANLEY SADIK ISMAYIL SAIPOOJA R.GAYATHRI M.MAHIN HAMZA ALWIN JOSEPH RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NEDUPUZHA POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680007 OTHER PRESENT: SANGEETHA RAJ PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This application is filed u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

2. The applicant is the accused No.3 in Crime No.542 /2023 of Nedupuzha Police Station. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506(i), 394 and 365 r/w 34 of IPC.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 17.07.2023 at

07.45 p.m., the applicant along with the remaining accused abducted the de facto complainant in a car and criminally intimidated him by saying that they would kill him. Further, the accused manhandled the de facto complainant, hit on his head using a chair, committed robbery of his motorcycle, snatched Rs.1,500/- from him and thereby committed the above said offences.

4. I have heard Sri.P.Mohamed Sabah , the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.Sangeetha Raj, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to

connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to get bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.

6. The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on

06.08.2023. Moreover, the applicant is a habitual offender. He is involved in 6 other crimes. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Considering the nature of the crime, how the petitioner is alleged to have complicity in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.

Sd/- DR.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE AS

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2023 Same Parties ARUN vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath