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.

Muhammad Aslam vs State of Kerala

Muhammad Aslam vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jun 24, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1442986

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./394/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Muhammad Aslam

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....petitioner entered idukki district and a crime was registered as crime no.812 of 2021 of marayur police station and he was again apprehended by the police and he was in custody for 27 days. thereafter, bail was granted by this court in the said crime in ba no.980 of 2022, in which a specific condition has imposed that the petitioner shall not violate any order passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the kaapa act. it is seen that the present crime is registered on 16.03.2022 ie., within the currency of the order passed by the kaapa authority. it is seen that petitioner has violated the order issued by the competent authority under the provisions of the kaapa act also thespecific directions issued by this court. the conduct of the petitioner clearly revealed that he has scant regard for the orders passed by this court in as much as he has violated the conditions imposed in ba no.980 of 2022. further that the petitioner is involved in seven other crimes also. having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations, i feel that the petitioner is not entitled to grant bail, at this stage. accordingly, bail application fails and is dismissed.sd/- viju abraham, judge r.av

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944 (CRIME NO.156/2022 OF Marayur Police Station, Idukki) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: SOORYA, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.NADARAJ, MGP/XII/38, ANAKKALPETTY BHAGAM, MICKLEGIRI KARA, PULIKKARAVAYAL, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685613 BY ADV C.SREEJITH (ELAMAKKARA) RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031. SR PP SMT.SEETHA S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.156 of 2022 of Marayur Police station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 143, 147, 148, 149, 308, 324 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution allegation is that on 16.03.2022, the petitioner and

four others waylaid the complainant at Cheruvadu bhagam, Kanthalloor Village, while he was travelling in an auto rickshaw and manhandled him. The accused dragged out the victim from the auto rickshaw and attacked him with a knife. The petitioner dealt blow with a knife and caused injury on his back. The second blow by the accused was avoided by victim and in the same, he sustained a cut injury on his hand. If he had no avoided that blow the same would have taken his life. The other accused also actively participated in the manhandling and thereby the petitioner committed the aforesaid offence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner was arrested on 17.03.2022 and is in custody since then.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that

the petitioner is involved in seven crimes and consequently KAAPA proceedings were initiated against the petitioner as per the order passed by the authority that the petitioner shall not enter the Idukki District for a period of six months. Learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that period of six months expired only in April 2022. While this order was pending, the petitioner entered Idukki District and a crime was registered as Crime No.812 of 2021 of Marayur Police Station and he was again apprehended by the police and he was in custody for 27 days. Thereafter, bail was granted by this court in the said crime in BA No.980 of 2022, in which a specific condition has imposed that the petitioner shall not violate any order passed by the competent authority under the provisions of the KAAPA Act. It is seen that the present crime is registered on 16.03.2022 ie., within the currency of the order passed by the KAAPA authority. It is seen that petitioner has violated the order issued by the competent authority under the provisions of the KAAPA Act also the

specific directions issued by this court. The conduct of the petitioner clearly revealed that he has scant regard for the orders passed by this court in as much as he has violated the conditions imposed in BA No.980 of 2022. Further that the petitioner is involved in seven other crimes also. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations, I feel that the petitioner is not entitled to grant bail, at this stage. Accordingly, bail application fails and is dismissed.

Sd/- VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE R.AV

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial