Sathyadas Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1016910
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnJul-23-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN
AppellantSathyadas
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice s.s.satheesachandran tuesday, the 23rd day of july 2013 1st sravana, 1935 bail appl..no. 4955 of 2013 () ------------------------------------------- crime no. 629/2013 of nedumangad police station , thiruvanandapuram petitioners/accused : -------------------------------------- 1. sathyadas, aged 4 years, s/o. chellayyan nadar, puthuval puthen veedu, chirakani, kizhakkumkara, vengodu p.o., vattappara, thiruvananthapuram.2. biju, aged 2 years, s/o. krishnan kutty, kurayath veedu, kizhakkum kara, chenthipur, vengodu p.o., nedumangad, thiruvananthapuram.3. sanal, aged 3 years, s/o. thankappan, chirakani, kizhakkumkara, puthuval puthenveedu, vengode p.o., thiruvananthapuram.4. rajesh, aged 2 years, s/o. raghavan nair, kunjuveedu, kizhakkumkara, vengode p.o., nedumangad, thiruvananthapuram. by advs.sri.s.rajeev sri.k.k.dheerendrakrishnan respondents/state : ------------------------------------- 1. state of kerala, rep.by public prosecutor, high court of kerala, ernakulam-682 031. (crime no.629/2013 of nedumangad police station thiruvananthapuram district).2. station house officer, nedumangad police station, thiruvananthapuram district-695 541. (crime no.629/2013 of nedumangad police station thiruvananthapuram district). r by public prosecutor,smt..laliza t.y this bail application having come up for admission on 23-07-2013, the court on the same day passed the following: dg s.s.satheesachandran, j ----------------------------------------- b.a.no. 4955 of 2013 ----------------------------------- dated this the 23rd day of july, 2013 order petitioners are the accused in crime no.629/2013 of nedumangadu police station, registered for offences punishable under sections 324 and 326 read with section 34 of the indian penal code. petitioners have filed the above application seeking pre-arrest bail under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure, for short "the code".2. allegation is that petitioners, four in number, pursuant to their common intention assaulted defacto complainant and his companion with lethal weapons, iron rods and caused them severe injuries. defacto complainant sustained fracture to his little finger in the right hand apart from other injuries. investigation of the crime is now in progress. allegations imputed against petitioners are false is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner. in fact defacto complainant was the assailant, and against him 1st petitioner filed a complaint initially before police and later before the court and the crime registered thereof is also now pending investigation, submits counsel. opposing the b.a.no. 4955 o”2. application learned public prosecutor submits that materials gathered by investigating agency, prima facie, disclose complicity of petitioners in the offences alleged and this is not a fit case where they can be granted pre-arrest bail.3. case diary has been produced for my perusal. looking into the materials covered by case diary, it is seen, previously another crime had been registered against petitioner on the allegation that he had inflicted stab injury to defacto complainant with a knife. that case after report filed by police was compromised by parties, is the submission of counsel. looking into the antecedents presented as against 1st petitioner with other facts and circumstances presented in the case which would prima facie disclose complicity of petitioners in the offences imputed. i find, this is not a fit case where they can be granted anticipatory bail. petition dismissed. sd/- s.s.satheesachandran, judge //true copy// p.a to judge dg
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2013 1ST SRAVANA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 4955 of 2013 () ------------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 629/2013 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION , THIRUVANANDAPURAM PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : -------------------------------------- 1. SATHYADAS, AGED 4 YEARS, S/O. CHELLAYYAN NADAR, PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, CHIRAKANI, KIZHAKKUMKARA, VENGODU P.O., VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. BIJU, AGED 2 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN KUTTY, KURAYATH VEEDU, KIZHAKKUM KARA, CHENTHIPUR, VENGODU P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. SANAL, AGED 3 YEARS, S/O. THANKAPPAN, CHIRAKANI, KIZHAKKUMKARA, PUTHUVAL PUTHENVEEDU, VENGODE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4. RAJESH, AGED 2 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN NAIR, KUNJUVEEDU, KIZHAKKUMKARA, VENGODE P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/STATE : ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. (CRIME NO.629/2013 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT).

2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 541. (CRIME NO.629/2013 OF NEDUMANGAD POLICE STATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT). R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,SMT..LALIZA T.Y THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DG S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 4955 of 2013 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2013 ORDER Petitioners are the accused in crime No.629/2013 of Nedumangadu Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioners have filed the above application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for short "the Code".

2. Allegation is that petitioners, four in number, pursuant to their common intention assaulted defacto complainant and his companion with lethal weapons, iron rods and caused them severe injuries. Defacto complainant sustained fracture to his little finger in the right hand apart from other injuries. Investigation of the crime is now in progress. Allegations imputed against petitioners are false is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner. In fact defacto complainant was the assailant, and against him 1st petitioner filed a complaint initially before police and later before the Court and the crime registered thereof is also now pending investigation, submits counsel. Opposing the B.A.No. 4955 o”

2. application learned Public Prosecutor submits that materials gathered by investigating agency, prima facie, disclose complicity of petitioners in the offences alleged and this is not a fit case where they can be granted pre-arrest bail.

3. Case Diary has been produced for my perusal. Looking into the materials covered by Case Diary, it is seen, previously another crime had been registered against petitioner on the allegation that he had inflicted stab injury to defacto complainant with a knife. That case after report filed by police was compromised by parties, is the submission of counsel. Looking into the antecedents presented as against 1st petitioner with other facts and circumstances presented in the case which would prima facie disclose complicity of petitioners in the offences imputed. I find, this is not a fit case where they can be granted anticipatory bail. Petition dismissed. Sd/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE DG