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.

Jayaraj vs State of Kerala

Jayaraj vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 22, 2023
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1411542

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
Case Number
Crl.MC/10643/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jayaraj

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....heard sri. syam j. sam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and sri.jacob e. simon, the learned public prosecutor appearing for the state.4. this court has already dismissed the application submitted by the petitioner for enlargement of time to surrender before the investigating officer. therefore, annexure-a3 was aconsequential order passed by this court. in fact, no such orderwas necessary in view of the fact that the bail granted by this court never came into existence as the pre-condition for the same, namely, to surrender before the investigating officer was never complied with. moreover, setting aside the annexure-a3order and permitting the petitioner to surrender before theinvestigating officer with all the benefits attached to the annexure-a1 order would amount to a review of the annexure-a2 order, and therefore, the same is not possible. therefore, i do not find any reason to interfere with the annexure-a3 order. however, this crl.m.c is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to surrender before the jurisdictional court, within a period of two weeks from today and to move for regular bail. in case any such application is submitted, the same shall be considered by the learned magistrate on the date of surrender itself, after hearing the learned public prosecutor provided the petitioner gives advance notice of the application to the learned public prosecution concerned.sd/- ziyad rahman a.a. judge rpk appendix of crl.mc 10643/2023 petitioner’s annexures annexure a1 the true copy of the bail order granted by this hon'ble court in bail application no 3836 of 2023 dated the 23rd day of june 2023 annexure a2 the true copy of the order in crl.m.appl.no.1/2023 in bail appl. no. 3836 of 2023 dated 7/11/ 2023 annexure a3 the certified copy of the order in crl.m.p 2933/2023 by chief judicial magistrate dated 22/11/2023

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 1ST POUSHA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 10643 OF 2023 CRIME NO.129/2023 OF MUSEUM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED: JAYARAJ AGED 55 YEARS S/O RASSUL, TC 10/185, VAYAL VIEW, MANNANTHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695015 BY ADV SYAM J SAM RESPONDENT/STATE AND COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 OTHER PRESENT: ADV JACOB E SIMON- PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This Crl.M.C is filed challenging the Annexure-A3

order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,

Thiruvananthapuram, in Crl.M.P No.2933/2023 in Crime No. 1st accused in the said crime, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 405, 406, 417, 418, and 420, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. As the petitioner apprehended arrest, he approached

this Court by filing an application for anticipatory bail, which was numbered as B.A. No. 3836/2023. After hearing the prosecution, the said application was allowed as per Annexure A1 order, directing the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from the date of the order, i.e. from 23.06.2023. However, the petitioner did not surrender before the Investigating Officer, and later, an application was submitted before this Court in the said bail application seeking enlargement of time. Since the said application was submitted belatedly, it was rejected as per the Annexure A2 order. Consequent to the same, the learned Magistrate passed Annexure-A3, cancelling the order of bail granted to the petitioner. The said order is under challenge in this Crl.M.C.

3. Heard Sri. Syam J. Sam, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Jacob E. Simon, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

4. This Court has already dismissed the application submitted by the petitioner for enlargement of time to surrender before the Investigating Officer. Therefore, Annexure-A3 was a

consequential order passed by this Court. In fact, no such order

was necessary in view of the fact that the bail granted by this Court never came into existence as the pre-condition for the same, namely, to surrender before the Investigating Officer was never complied with. Moreover, setting aside the Annexure-A3

order and permitting the petitioner to surrender before the

Investigating Officer with all the benefits attached to the Annexure-A1 order would amount to a review of the Annexure-A2 order, and therefore, the same is not possible. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the Annexure-A3 order. However, this Crl.M.C is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to surrender before the Jurisdictional Court, within a period of two weeks from today and to move for regular bail. In case any such application is submitted, the same shall be considered by the learned Magistrate on the date of surrender itself, after hearing the learned Public prosecutor provided the petitioner gives advance notice of the application to the learned Public Prosecution concerned.

Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE rpk APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10643/2023 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BAIL ORDER GRANTED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN BAIL APPLICATION NO 3836 OF 2023 DATED THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2023 ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2023 IN BAIL APPL. NO. 3836 OF 2023 DATED 7/11/ 2023 ANNEXURE A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P 2933/2023 BY CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE DATED 22/11/2023

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial