High CourtsSingle Bench

Riyas vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 20 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 KL CK 0044

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120(B), 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324, 326, 427, 506(ii) · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 7044 Of 2020
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

24 paragraphs · 465 words
1.

This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

2.

Petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.700 of 2020 of Vilappilssala Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered against the

petitioner and the other accused alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 506(ii), 323, 324, 326, 308 427 and 120(B) of

the Indian Penal Code and the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act is also alleged.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 10.06.2020 at about 9.30 p.m the petitioner and other accused persons together wrongfully restrained the defacto

complainant, while he was proceeding to his house in a scooter and the 3rd accused attacked him with handle of chopper and the 6th accused caught

hold of his hand and dragged him on the road and has beaten with an iron rod and sticks on various parts of his body and inflicted injuries on him. It is

also alleged that they damage his scooter and mobile phone.

4.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the other accused were already released on bail. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to

abide any conditions in this Court grant him bail. The counsel also submitted that as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no serious overt act is

alleged against him. The counsel submitted that the serious overt act is alleged against the 6th accused. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is

ready to abide any condition, if this Court grant him bail.

6.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

The Public Prosecutor submitted that one of the fatal injury is inflicted by the petitioner in this case. The other main accused were released on bail by

the court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

7.

After hearing both sides, I think this is not a fit case, in which this court can grant bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. At this stage the

counsel for the petitioner submitted that he will surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Therefore, this bail

application is disposed with the following conditions.

1.

The petitioner will surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today.

2.

If the petitioner surrender before the Investigating Officer, the Investigating Officer after interrogation produce the petitioner before the

jurisdictional court on the same day.

3.

At that stage, if any bail application is filed by the petitioner after give prior notice to the Public Prosecutor concerned, the learned Magistrate will

consider the bail application preferably on the date of filing of the same itself.