CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Gireesh@Sreejith vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 17 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KL CK 0140

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 302, 307, 308, 323, 324, 326, 341, 342, 354, 365, 427, 506, 506(ii) · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27 · Explosive Substances Act, 1908 — Section 3
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 790 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 503 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.1952/2021 of Kadakkavoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram alleging commission of offences under Sections 342, 294(b), 324, 506, 365, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

2.

The allegation against the petitioners is that they kidnapped the de facto complainant in a car on 6.12.2021 and attempted to kill him. It is alleged that the accused were armed with dangerous weapons such as sword, chopper, knife etc. It is also alleged that, while in the car, the petitioners along with the other accused in the case brutally attacked the de facto complainant.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that absolutely false allegations had been raised against the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners have been in custody for more than 100 days and their continued detention is not necessary for the purposes of any investigation as a final report has already been filed in the matter.

4.

Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail, primarily on the ground that both the petitioners have criminal antecedents. In so far as accused No.1 is concerned, it is pointed out that, following cases have been registered against him:-

I. Crime No.14/2006 of Kadakkavoor Police Station, U/s.143, 147, 149, 341, 323 & 379 of IPC.

II. Crime No.486/2021 of Kadakkavoor Police Station,U/s.143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 326 & 302 of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act.

III. Crime No.100/2003 of Kallambalam Police Station, U/s.143, 147, 149, 341, 323 & 506(ii) of IPC and Section 27 of Arms Act.

In so far as accused No.2 is concerned, following cases have been registered against him:-

I. Crime No.06/2019 of Attingal Police Station, U/s.143, 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 427, 452 & 308 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.

II. Crime No.1314/2019 of Attingal Police Station, U/s.294(b), 451, 323, 324 & 354 of IPC.

III. Crime No.1817/2020 of Attingal Police Station, U/s.447, 294 (b), 341 & 323 r/w. Section 34 of IPC.

While it is admitted that in respect of accused No.1, two of the cases pertain to the year 2003 and 2006, it is pointed out that, in the year 2021, the 1st accused is alleged to have committed the offence punishable under Section  302 of the Indian Penal Code. In so far as the 2nd accused is concerned, it is submitted that most of the cases reported against him as criminal antecedents are fairly recent and include two cases registered alleging commission of offences under Section 308 of the Indian Penal Code.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and despite the vehement submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are not entitled to bail at this point of time.

In the result, the bail applications will stand dismissed.