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 · 259 wordsK.Haripal, J
The petitioner, who is the 5th accused in Crime No.535/2020 of Kuthuparamba police station, has approached the Court under Section 438 of the
Cr.P.C.
The allegations against the petitioner and others are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 and 307 IPC read with Section 149 IPC
and also Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Public Prosecutor.
The alleged incident had happened on 27.02.2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had not used any weapon of
offence, nothing is recoverable from him and therefore, he pressed for granting anticipatory bail.
These submissions have been rebutted by the learned Public Prosecutor. According to the Public Prosecutor, the petitioner had also used weapons
of offence against the defacto complainant and therefore, his custodial interrogation is necessary.
After going through the records, I am also not convinced that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail. Records indicate that the petitioner and
other gang had, in prosecution of the common object of an unlawful assembly and armed with deadly weapons and explosive substances attacked and
injured the defacto complainant and his friends. The nature of the allegations do not prompt this Court to grant him any relief. He is not entitled to get
any relief. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer, his arrest, if any, shall be recorded and further proceedings shall be
taken with utmost expedition.
The petition is disposed of.