Satheesh V. vs the Sub Inspector of Police, Chokli Police Station

Satheesh V. vs The Sub Inspector of Police, Chokli Police Station

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Mar 17, 2020

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1753743

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/1753743
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.
Decided On: Mar 17, 2020
Case Number: Bail Appl./1758/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Satheesh V.

Respondent

The Sub Inspector of Police, Chokli Police Station

Excerpt

.....the following:orderdated this the 17th day of march 2020 application for regular bail.2. the petitioners are accused nos.2, 3 and 4 in crime no. 693 of 2019 of chokli police station, thalassery registered for the offences punishable under section 395 f the indian penal code.3. the 1st petitioner was arrested on 27.12.2019 and petitioners 2 and 3 were arrested on 28.12.2019.4. the prosecution allegation is as follows:on 3.12.2019 at about 12.15 hours the defacto complainant was driving a scooter bearing reg. no. kl 58 aa 5751 with an amount of rs.17 lakhs along with him. while so, he was intercepted by the accused by blocking the scooter by a swift car and committed robbery of the entire amount of rs.17 lakhs and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.5. this is the second application for bail filedby the petitioners/accused nos. 2, 3 and 4. it is well settled that a second application for bail can be considered only if the party could point out change in the circumstances so as to have a fresh look into thefacts of the case, and to exercise the discretion ofthe case in favour of the petitioners.6. here, it is pertinent to note that no suchcircumstance has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners. moreover, all the petitioners are having criminal background, as the 3rd petitioner is involved in 5 other cases, the 2nd petitioner is involved in 4 other cases and the 1 st petitioner is involved in two other cases. considering the criminal background of the petitioners and the other circumstances involved in this case, i am not inclined to allow this application at this stage of investigation. therefore, the period of incarceration is not a relevant factor to take a lenient approach. dismissed.sd/- shircy v. judge sb

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1941 Bail Appl..No.1758 OF 2020 AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 140/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,THALASSERY CRIME NO.693/2019 OF Chokli Police Station, Kannur PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 2, 3 AND 4: 1 SATHEESH V. S/O.SUBRAN,VALIYOLIPARAMBAL HOUSE,EZHATTUPURAM,ANGAMALI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2 DEEPAK.P.K @ DEEPU, S/O.ASHOKAN,MEETHALE KELOTH HOUSE, CHALAKKARA,MAHE. 3 NOUSHAR.K.K, AGED 39 YEARS S/O.ABOOBACKER,KANIYAMKUNNU HOUSE,PAVANNOORMOTTA,MAYYIL, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KOOMBI HOUSE, ULIYIL,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: 1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOKLI POLICE STATION CHOKLI POLICE STATION,KANNUR DISTRICT-670672. 2 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031. OTHER PRESENT: PP AJITH MURALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 17th day of March 2020 Application for regular bail.

2. The petitioners are accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 in Crime No. 693 of 2019 of Chokli Police Station, Thalassery registered for the offences punishable under Section 395 f the Indian Penal Code.

3. The 1st petitioner was arrested on 27.12.2019 and petitioners 2 and 3 were arrested on 28.12.2019.

4. The prosecution allegation is as follows:

On 3.12.2019 at about 12.15 hours the defacto complainant was driving a scooter bearing Reg. No. KL 58 AA 5751 with an amount of Rs.17 lakhs along with him. While so, he was intercepted by the accused by blocking the scooter by a swift car and committed robbery of the entire amount of Rs.17 lakhs and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.

5. This is the second application for bail filed

by the petitioners/accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4. It is well settled that a second application for bail can be considered only if the party could point out change in the circumstances so as to have a fresh look into the

facts of the case, and to exercise the discretion of

the case in favour of the petitioners.

6. Here, it is pertinent to note that no such

circumstance has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Moreover, all the petitioners are having criminal background, as the 3rd petitioner is involved in 5 other cases, the 2nd petitioner is involved in 4 other cases and the 1 st petitioner is involved in two other cases. Considering the criminal background of the petitioners and the other circumstances involved in this case, I am not inclined to allow this application at this stage of investigation. Therefore, the period of incarceration is not a relevant factor to take a lenient approach. Dismissed.

Sd/- SHIRCY V. JUDGE sb

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2020 Same Parties Satheesh V. vs The Sub Inspector of Police, Chokli Police Sta... Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.