Robinson vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 27, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1635008

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/1635008
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias
Decided On: Apr 27, 2021
Case Number: Crl.MC/2399/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Robinson

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....ernakulam. other present: sri.santhosh peter - sr.pp this criminal misc. case having come up for admission on 27.04.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:orderdated this the 27th day of april, 2021 this petition is filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure.2. the petitioner is the accused no.1 in crimeno.276/2001 of the cantonment police station, thiruvananthapuram, registered against him for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 341, 324, 326 read with section 149 of the indian penal code. the police after investigation have filed the final report before thiruvananthapuram, as against the petitioner and other accused persons.3. it is the case of the petitioner that he was notarrested during the crime stage. he was unaware of the pendency of the case. the petitioner was all along employed abroad and no notice of the case was served onhim. the learned magistrate acquitted the accused 3 to 5 and split up and re-filed the case as against the petitioner as l.p.no.29 of 2008. the petitioner has now come down to india. he is prepared to surrender before the learned magistrate and get himself enlarged on bail. however, he apprehends that he would be remanded to judicial custody.4. this court as in sujatha v. state of kerala[2015 khc 520] and biju s.praveen v. state of kerala and another [2007 khc 3436] has categorically laid down the law that remanding an accused to custody, pending trial, in a casual manner cannot be justified and that courts should always be careful while passing orders on bail applications, as it deals with personal liberty.5. considering the limited relief that has been sought in the petition and the law laid down by this court in the aforesaid decisions, i am inclined to dispose of the crl.m.c in the following manner:-(i) the petitioner is permitted to surrender before thiruvananthapuram and move an application for bail in l.p.no.29/2008.(ii) in the event of the petitioner filing.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1943 L.P. NO: 29/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ROBINSON, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.SUMAN, “ROSY”, T.C. 34/60, KANNANTHURU, SANGUMUGHAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJIN S.HAMEED RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. OTHER PRESENT: SRI.SANTHOSH PETER - SR.PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 27th day of April, 2021 This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioner is the accused No.1 in Crime

No.276/2001 of the Cantonment Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, registered against him for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 341, 324, 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The Police after investigation have filed the final report before Thiruvananthapuram, as against the petitioner and other accused persons.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was not

arrested during the crime stage. He was unaware of the pendency of the case. The petitioner was all along employed abroad and no notice of the case was served on

him. The learned Magistrate acquitted the accused 3 to 5 and split up and re-filed the case as against the petitioner as L.P.No.29 of 2008. The petitioner has now come down to India. He is prepared to surrender before the learned Magistrate and get himself enlarged on bail. However, he apprehends that he would be remanded to judicial custody.

4. This Court as in Sujatha v. State of Kerala

[2015 KHC 520] and Biju S.Praveen v. State of Kerala and another [2007 KHC 3436] has categorically laid down the law that remanding an accused to custody, pending trial, in a casual manner cannot be justified and that Courts should always be careful while passing orders on bail applications, as it deals with personal liberty.

5. Considering the limited relief that has been sought in the petition and the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions, I am inclined to dispose of the Crl.M.C in the following manner:-

(i) The petitioner is permitted to surrender before Thiruvananthapuram and move an application for bail in L.P.No.29/2008.

(ii) In the event of the petitioner filing such

application, the learned Magistrate shall consider the bail application on the date of surrender itself and pass orders on the same day itself, keeping in mind the ratio of this Court in Sujatha v. State of Kerala and Biju S.Praveen v. State of Kerala and another (supra).

(iii) In order to provide the petitioner an opportunity to surrender and seek bail, the non-bailable warrant pending against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today. Sd/- C.S.DIAS JUDGE NR/27/04/2021

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties Robinson vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias