Prejith Kumar vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jul 30, 2020

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1782500

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/1782500
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Jul 30, 2020
Case Number: Bail Appl./4178/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prejith Kumar

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 436, 427 r/w section 34 of the indian penal code.2. the prosecution case in brief is thus: on05.02.2019 at about 10 p.m., 8 identifiable persons allegedly trespassed into the residence of the defacto complainant with the intention to commit murder, armed with deadly weapons like swords and committed riot. the defacto complainant was not available in his house at that point in time. annoyed by not being able to accomplish their motive, the accused set fire to his house, and bullet motor cycle parked in the compound, causing a loss of rs.50 lakhs to him.3. it is stated that the applicant was employed abroad and started some business with the defacto complainant. the defacto complainant allegedly betrayed him by giving some information to the police in consequence of which the friends of the applicant got arrested. annoyed with that, inretaliation, the applicant had hired the co-accused persons for murder of the defacto complainant. however, no offence under section 307 or for conspiracy under section 120b has been incorporated. nevertheless, the allegations would indicate that the applicant had very resolute intentions of causing harm to the defacto complainant and had caused a huge loss to him. the accused 2 to 7, 12 and 13 were arrested and granted regular bail. the 1 st accused had gone abroad and therefore, could not be arrested. accused 10 and 11 are yet to be identified. certain weapons will have to be recovered. the learned public prosecutor has therefore, serious objection of granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant because he has to be subjected to custodial interrogation to know regarding the details of how the incident was planned by him.4. considering the gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to the remedy of a pre-arrest bail in this matter. in the result, he is directed to surrender beforethe investigating officer within one month, and after interrogation and recovery and arrest,.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1942 CRIME NO.168/2019 OF Nedumangad Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram PETITIONER/S: PREJITH KUMAR AGED 31 YEARS S/O.PRABHA KUMAR, RESIDING AT PRABHALAYAM, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 012. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM) RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI. C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Dated this the 30th day of July 2020 Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 1st accused in Crime No.168 of 2019 of Nedumangad Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 436, 427 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case in brief is thus: On

05.02.2019 at about 10 p.m., 8 identifiable persons allegedly trespassed into the residence of the defacto complainant with the intention to commit murder, armed with deadly weapons like swords and committed riot. The defacto complainant was not available in his house at that point in time. Annoyed by not being able to accomplish their motive, the accused set fire to his house, and Bullet motor cycle parked in the compound, causing a loss of Rs.50 Lakhs to him.

3. It is stated that the applicant was employed abroad and started some business with the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant allegedly betrayed him by giving some information to the police in consequence of which the friends of the applicant got arrested. Annoyed with that, in

retaliation, the applicant had hired the co-accused persons for murder of the defacto complainant. However, no offence under Section 307 or for conspiracy under Section 120B has been incorporated. Nevertheless, the allegations would indicate that the applicant had very resolute intentions of causing harm to the defacto complainant and had caused a huge loss to him. The accused 2 to 7, 12 and 13 were arrested and granted regular bail. The 1 st accused had gone abroad and therefore, could not be arrested. Accused 10 and 11 are yet to be identified. Certain weapons will have to be recovered. The learned Public Prosecutor has therefore, serious objection of granting pre-arrest bail to the applicant because he has to be subjected to custodial interrogation to know regarding the details of how the incident was planned by him.

4. Considering the gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to the remedy of a pre-arrest bail in this matter. In the result, he is directed to surrender before

the Investigating Officer within one month, and after interrogation and recovery and arrest, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court, where he is at liberty to apply for a regular bail, which shall be considered and preferably disposed of on the very same day. With these observations, the Bail Application is disposed of. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE dxy

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2020 Same Parties Prejith Kumar vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon