High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 KL CK 0146

Sameer Babu.N.P vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 14 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1493 Of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 313 words
1.

This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2.

The petitioner herein is the accused in Crime No.395 of 2017 of the Vellayil Police Station, registered under Sections 341 & 332 of the IPC.

3.

The crux of the prosecution allegation is that, on 1.12.2017 at 4.40 pm, the petitioner wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant, who is the officer-in-charge of Malsyabhavan, Vellayil, and assaulted him.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are without basis. The victim and the petitioner belongs to two different political factions and their enmity has resulted in this false implication.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. He has made available the case diary for perusal.

6.

The wound certificate of the victim shows that he had sustained numerous injuries on his face. This probablises the case of the prosecution. Further, it is pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is a hardened criminal and numerous crimes have been registered against him at the Nadakkavu, Panniyankara and Town Police Stations, Kozhikkode.

7.

Having regard to nature and gravity of the allegations, the antecedents of the petitioner and attendant facts, I do not think that this is a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

8.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requested that the petitioner be permitted to surrender and directions be issued to consider his application for bail. I find no reason to issue any specific directions in that regard more so in a petition under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. It is for the petitioner to surrender before the investigating officer or the Court having jurisdiction expeditiously. There is no reason for the petitioner to apprehend that his application for bail will not be considered expeditiously and on its merits.

This petition will stand dismissed.