High CourtsSingle Bench

Shebeer vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 18 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 KL CK 0103

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammed Nias C.P. J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294(b), 308 323, 324, 334, 506(ii)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8726 Of 2023
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

8 paragraphs · 309 words

Mohammed Nias C.P., J

1.

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.1368/2023 of Kunnamkulam Police Station, Thrissur District, for having committed offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 294(b), 308 & 506(ii) r/w section 334 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 18.09.2023 at 8 p.m., at Chirackal Pengamuck, the accused persons 1 to 3 approached the defacto complainant while he was talking to his native one Asharaf due to prior enmity towards them as Asharaf gave a complaint to Kunnamkulam Police against A2 and A3, possessed with an iron rod and sword stick and A1 uttered obscene words and chopped on the right side of the defacto complainant with the sword stick and inflicted injuries to him and when the defacto complainant fell down A2 beat on his neck with an iron rod, and A3 hit on his chest with an iron weapon. When A1 attempted to chop again, the defacto complainant pushed and evaded that attack timely, or else, it would have resulted in his death, thereby committing the above offence.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would say that the petitioner is totally innocent and falsely implicated with ulterior motives. At any rate, he points out that the petitioner has been in custody since 19/09/2023, and continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary.

5.

The Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

6.

Considering the injuries inflicted as seen from the wound certificate, five other antecedents of the petitioner, the fact that recovery of the weapon has not been effected so far, and the fact that the other accused are not yet arrested, I am not inclined to grant bail at this stage.

The bail application is accordingly dismissed.