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.

Anilkumar vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Feb 17, 2021
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1601796

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./1462/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anilkumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....influence and intimidate witnesses. therefore, it is submitted that the applicant may not be released on bail until the trial is over.6. the learned counsel appearing for theapplicant submits that in most of the cases, the applicant has been acquitted and since 2014 he was not involved in any crime. therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.7. after having heard the submissions on both sides, i find that there are crucial matters to be considered. it is true that there are noeyewitness for the applicant committing the murder. but there is evidence to the effect that the applicant started assaulting the deceased at the toddy shop, and thereafter he continued to assault ultimately resulting in his death. the presence of the applicant was noticed by certain persons at the scene of occurrence and their evidence is very crucial for the trial of this case. considering the fact that the applicant has criminal antecedents, and that he is involved in brutal murder, and has even without any weapon, caused the death of a person with bare hands, indicates the brutality of the murder. considering these aspects, i am not inclined to grant him bail. the final report has already been filed, and i direct the committal court and also the trial court to expedite the trial and take it to its logical conclusion at the earliest. sd/- ashok menon judge spk

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 28TH MAGHA,1942 CRIME NO.1491/2020 OF Koratty Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER/S: ANILKUMAR AGED 28 YEARS SON OF SIVAN, KIZHAKKEPURATH HOUSE, KONNAKUZHI DESOM, PARIYARAM P.O., CHALAKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, BY ADV. SRI.N.L.BITTO RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R1 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI. S.SAJJU SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 17th day of February 2021 The applicant has filed successive bail applications. He is the second accused in Crime No.1491/2020 of Koratty Police Station, Thrissur, for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.11.2020 between 6.30 p.m and 8.30 p.m, the applicant in furtherance of common intention with the 1st accused attacked the deceased named Eby by

kicking and fisting him alleging that he had committed theft of their purse and mobile phone, and assaulted them brutally first inside a Toddy shop. When the Toddy Shop Manager asked them to go out, they followed the deceased and thereafter allegedly continued with assault ultimately resulting in his death. The postmortem report indicates that there was a fracture to his sternum and almost all the ribs were broken. There were penetrating injuries and internal bleeding which led to his death.

3. The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are not true. His bail application was dismissed by this Court for the

reason that the investigation is still its infancy. Now the final report has already been filed and the committal proceedings are pending, there is no purpose for further detention of the applicant and therefore he may be released on bail.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor has

vehemently opposed the application for bail stating that the applicant is a person having criminal antecedents. The co-accused is also having criminal antecedents. The applicant is involved in seven crimes from the year 2008 to 2014 and that there are only circumstantial evidences and that the witnesses had seen the presence of the accused persons and the Manager of the Toddy shop has also testified to the effect that the quarrel had started from inside the Toddy shop, and therefore in case the applicant is released on bail at this stage, there is every possibility that he may attempt to influence and intimidate witnesses. Therefore, it is submitted that the applicant may not be released on bail until the trial is over.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the

applicant submits that in most of the cases, the applicant has been acquitted and since 2014 he was not involved in any crime. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

7. After having heard the submissions on both sides, I find that there are crucial matters to be considered. It is true that there are no

eyewitness for the applicant committing the murder. But there is evidence to the effect that the applicant started assaulting the deceased at the toddy shop, and thereafter he continued to assault ultimately resulting in his death. The presence of the applicant was noticed by certain persons at the scene of occurrence and their evidence is very crucial for the trial of this case. Considering the fact that the applicant has criminal antecedents, and that he is involved in brutal murder, and has even without any weapon, caused the death of a person with bare hands, indicates the brutality of the murder. Considering these aspects, I am not inclined to grant him bail. The final report has already been filed, and I direct the committal court and also the trial court to expedite the trial and take it to its logical conclusion at the earliest. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE SPK

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial