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.

Sali vs State of Kerala

SALI vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 08, 2022
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1445074

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.A/85/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SALI

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....but during the course of investigation offences under sc/st act were added. it is contended by the learned counsel that the investigation pending does not require presence of the petitioner in custody and therefore he is entitled for a release on bail.3. as per the report filed by the learned public prosecutor the petitioner was the master mind behind the commission of the offence by the 1st accused. infact the 1st accused had stabbed the defacto complainant and inflicted a serious injury on his abdomen. according to the prosecution, the 1 st accuseddhanesh is a station rowdy of kaipamangalam police station having about 15 criminal cases in his credit, including murder attempts, homicide and cases registered under the ndps act. the investigation so far conducted revealed to the investigating agency that the 2nd accused hired the 1st accused for committing the crime for the reason that a demand was made by the defacto complainant to the 2 nd accused for the money owed to him.4. as per the report, the investigation is progressing and several material aspects are yet to be collected in evidence. the crl.appeal no.85 of 2022 4 investigating agency apprehends that on release of the appellant at this stage, he would interfere with the investigation. in the above circumstances, the appeal deserves dismissal. in the result, appeal is dismissed. sd/- mary joseph judge mjl crl.appeal no.85 of 2022 5appendix of crl.a 85/2022 petitioner’s annexures: annexure 1 copy of fir no.1136/21 dated 22-11-21 of valappad police station annexure 2 certified copy of order dated 01-01-2022 of 1st additional sessions court thrissur in crl.m.c.2052/2021 annexure 3 certified copy of order dated 15-01-2022 of 1st additional sessions court thrissur in crl. m.p. 70/2022respondents’ annexures: nil true copy pa to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 19TH MAGHA, 1943 CRL.A NO. 85 OF 2022

ORDER DATED 15.01.2022 OF FIRST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT,

THRISSUR IN CRL.M.P.NO.70/2022 IN CRIME NO.1136/2021 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. APPELLANT/2ND ACCUSED: SALI AGED 35, SO SATHAR, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULINCHODE DESOM, EDATHURUTHI VILLAGE, THRISSUR-680683 BY ADV SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM - 682031 ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED ADDL.R2 RAJESH 34 YEARS, S/O RAMACHANDRAN,PUNNAPPULLIYIL HOUSE,KAIRALI ROAD, EDAMUTTAM,VALAPPAD,THRISSUR-680567 ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 04.02.22 IN CRL.MA.NO 1/22 IN CRL.A 85/22 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI SANAL P RAJ THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.Appeal No.85 of 2022 2

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 08th day of February, 2022

This Appeal is filed against an order passed by District and Sessions Court, Thrissur in Crl.MP No.70/2022. Crl.MP No.70/2022 is an application filed by the petitioner under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘the Cr.P.C’) before the above court seeking regular bail. The application was dismissed by the court for two reasons such as gravity of the offences and the pendency of investigation. It was further stated that if released on bail, the petitioner would hamper with investigation.

2. The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court in

the appeal on hand. Sri.Dilip J.Akkara, the learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the appellant was taken into judicial custody on 27.11.2021 and 73 days’ custody is over as

 on date.   According to him even as per the allegations of the
 Investigating Agency,     petitioner has not contributed to the
 commission of the crime by any overt act.       According to him

originally an offence under Section 307 alone was there in the Crl.Appeal No.85 of 2022 3 crime registered, but during the course of investigation offences under SC/ST Act were added. It is contended by the learned counsel that the investigation pending does not require presence of the petitioner in custody and therefore he is entitled for a release on bail.

3. As per the report filed by the learned Public Prosecutor the petitioner was the master mind behind the commission of

 the offence by the 1st accused. Infact       the 1st accused had
 stabbed the defacto complainant and inflicted a serious      injury
 on his abdomen.     According to the prosecution, the 1 st accused

Dhanesh is a station rowdy of Kaipamangalam Police Station having about 15 criminal cases in his credit, including murder attempts, homicide and cases registered under the NDPS Act. The investigation so far conducted revealed to the Investigating Agency that the 2nd accused hired the 1st accused for committing the crime for the reason that a demand was made by the defacto complainant to the 2 nd accused for the money owed to him.

4. As per the report, the investigation is progressing and several material aspects are yet to be collected in evidence. The Crl.Appeal No.85 of 2022 4 Investigating Agency apprehends that on release of the appellant at this stage, he would interfere with the investigation. In the above circumstances, the appeal deserves dismissal. In the result, appeal is dismissed. Sd/- MARY JOSEPH JUDGE MJL Crl.Appeal No.85 of 2022 5

APPENDIX OF CRL.A 85/2022 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1 COPY OF FIR NO.1136/21 DATED 22-11-21 OF VALAPPAD POLICE STATION ANNEXURE 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 01-01-2022 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT THRISSUR IN CRL.M.C.2052/2021 ANNEXURE 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER DATED 15-01-2022 OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT THRISSUR IN CRL. M.P. 70/2022

RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES: NIL TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial