Satheesh vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jan 22, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1593168

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/1593168
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Jan 22, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./479/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satheesh

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....also initiated under section 15(1) of the kaapa act, and there is every possibility that he will intimidate or influencewitnesses and considering his criminal antecedents, the witnesses may not dare to testify against him. it is with that intention in mind that the application for bail was rejected by this court.2. the applicant's state that the final report has been filed and the trial is not progressing and even the committal proceedings were adjourned 10 times. hence, there is nopossibility of the trial concluding expeditiously. the applicant therefore, once again seeks indulgence of this court to grant bail. the applicant's bail application was rejected earlier with the purpose. the fact that the trial is not progressing and that he has been in custody for a fairly long time are no reasons for entertaining application for bail, which was dismissed on merits.3. the custody of an accused in remand, pending trialis not illegal and does not violate the provisions of article 21 of the constitution of india. the learned sessions court and the committal court, were also directed to expedite the matter. but, it seems that unfortunately, due to the pandemic situation they were not able to expedite the matter.4. under the circumstances, the application isdismissed with an observation that the committal proceedings shall be concluded without any delay, and thereafter, the trial also shall commenced at the earliest. with these observations, the application is disposed of. sd/ - ashok m enon judge nr/ 22/ 01/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942 Bail Appl..No.479 OF 2021 C.P.NO.29/2020 ON THE FILES OF J.F.C.M, ANGAMALY CRIME NO.1827/2019 OF ANGAMALY POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.7: SATHEESH, AGED 27 YEARS, SON OF KUTTAPPAN, PERUMBAN KUDIYIL HOUSE, KURUMASSERY. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-683579 BY ADVS. SRI.MANU TOM SRI.K.R.JITHIN SRI.JERRY VARGHESE SHRI.BALAMURALI K.P. SHRI.SHAJI T.M. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031 OTHER PRESENT: SRI.SANTHOSH PETER - SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dat ed t hi he22nd dayofJ st anuary,2021 APPLICATION FOR REGULAR BAIL

This is a successive bail application filed by the applicant, seeking bail stating that he has been in custody since 21.08.2020. His earlier bail application filed as B.A.No.7391/2020, which was dismissed by this Court on 19.11.2020, mainly on the ground that the main offence alleged is one under Sections 307 and 395 of the IPC, allegedly committed by the applicant as a member of an unlawful assembly. The applicant is a history-sheeter having five other cases registered against him. Proceedings were also initiated under Section 15(1) of the KAAPA Act, and there is every possibility that he will intimidate or influence

witnesses and considering his criminal antecedents, the witnesses may not dare to testify against him. It is with that intention in mind that the application for bail was rejected by this Court.

2. The applicant's state that the final report has been filed and the trial is not progressing and even the committal proceedings were adjourned 10 times. Hence, there is no

possibility of the trial concluding expeditiously. The applicant therefore, once again seeks indulgence of this Court to grant bail. The applicant's bail application was rejected earlier with the purpose. The fact that the trial is not progressing and that he has been in custody for a fairly long time are no reasons for entertaining application for bail, which was dismissed on merits.

3. The custody of an accused in remand, pending trial

is not illegal and does not violate the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The learned sessions court and the committal court, were also directed to expedite the matter. But, it seems that unfortunately, due to the pandemic situation they were not able to expedite the matter.

4. Under the circumstances, the application is

dismissed with an observation that the committal proceedings shall be concluded without any delay, and thereafter, the trial also shall commenced at the earliest. With these observations, the application is disposed of. Sd/ - ASHOK M ENON JUDGE NR/ 22/ 01/

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties Satheesh vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon