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.

Sajan vs State of Kerala

SAJAN vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jan 31, 2019
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1848516

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./89/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SAJAN

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice sunil thomas thursday, the 31st day of january 2019 / 11th magha, 1940 crime no. 1582/2018 of kattakada police station, thiruvananthapuram petitioners/accused no.1 to 3: 1 sajan, s/o. simon, punnakkala, puthenveedu, 2 sanal @ kunjan, kaithakkuzhi, puthenveedu, aravankonam, katakkada, thiruvananthapuram 3 syam @ tharan, s/o. sasi, syam bhavanam, by adv. sri.m.r.sasith respondents: 1 state of kerala represented by the public prosecutor, high court of kerala 682031 2 the sub inspector, kattakada police station 691 001 sr.pp b jayasurya this bail application having come up for admission on 31.01.2019, the court on the same day passed the following:o r d e rpetitioners stand arrayed as accused nos.1 to 3 in crime no.1582/2018 of kattakada police station for offences punishable under sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 308 & 34 of ipc and section 27 of arms act. the allegation of the prosecution is that on 15.11.2018, due to previous enmity, while the de facto complainant was proceeding in a car, he was intercepted and pulled out from the car by the accused. 1st accused hit on his head with a sword. 2 nd accused hit on his shoulder with an iron rod. 3rd accused assaulted him with another iron rod. he sustained bleeding injury on the scalp and a fracture of the shoulder bone.2. evidently, the allegation against the petitioners is serious. substantial injuries are seen caused. dangerous weapons are used. considering these facts, i am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. bail application fails and is dismissed. sd/- sunil thomas, judge pn 01/02

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 11TH MAGHA, 1940 CRIME NO. 1582/2018 OF KATTAKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3: 1 SAJAN, S/O. SIMON, PUNNAKKALA, PUTHENVEEDU, 2 SANAL @ KUNJAN, KAITHAKKUZHI, PUTHENVEEDU, ARAVANKONAM, KATAKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3 SYAM @ THARAN, S/O. SASI, SYAM BHAVANAM, BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENTS: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR, KATTAKADA POLICE STATION 691 001 SR.PP B JAYASURYA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Petitioners stand arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.1582/2018 of Kattakada Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 308 & 34 of IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act. The allegation of the prosecution is that on 15.11.2018, due to previous enmity, while the de facto complainant was proceeding in a car, he was intercepted and pulled out from the car by the accused. 1st accused hit on his head with a sword. 2 nd accused hit on his shoulder with an iron rod. 3rd accused assaulted him with another iron rod. He sustained bleeding injury on the scalp and a fracture of the shoulder bone.

2. Evidently, the allegation against the petitioners is serious. Substantial injuries are seen caused. Dangerous weapons are used. Considering these facts, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Bail application fails and is dismissed. Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE Pn 01/02

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial