High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

VISHAKH. M.S. vs THE STATE OF KERALA

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 26 October 2017 · Citation: (2017) 10 KL CK 0019

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.M.Babu
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
<a href=3863>Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973</a>, <a href=3863-438>Section 438</a> - Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest · <a href=1767>Indian Penal Code, 1860</a>, <a href=1767-34>Section 34</a>, <a href=1767-324>Section 3
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
7041 of 2017
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

36 paragraphs · 326 words
1.

Petitioners seek bail under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C . They are

the accused in crime no.2177/2017 of Chathannoor police

station, Kollam district. They have allegedly committed

offences punishable under Secs 323, 324, 326 and 506 of IPC

read with IPC 34.

2.

The prosecution case is this: The accused persons

had previous animosity towards the first informant. At about

4.00 p.m on 10.9.2017 the accused beat the first informant

Jayakrishnan and his friend Vinayak on their heads with iron

bangles and kicked them. Both the victims sustained injuries

and the first informant sustained a grievous injury.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned public prosecutor.

4.

The defence version is that everything happened

during a football match. It is submitted that there was no

premeditation to commit any crime. It is seen stated in the

application that the first informant sustained only minor

injuries.

5.

It is true that it all happened during a football

match. But the injuries sustained by the first informant cannot

be simplified as minor. The records show that he did sustain a

linear undisplaced fracture involving left occipital bone. There

has been a grievous hurt within the meaning of Sec.320 of IPC .

Materials are available against the petitioners to prosecute

them. Investigation is at its initial stage. I do no consider this

to be a fit case to grant bail under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C .

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners wish to surrender before the investigating

officer. The petitioners have the freedom to do so. In the

event of such surrender the investigating officer after

interrogation shall produce the petitioners before the court

concerned within the time allowed by the Cr.P.C . On such

production the court concerned will act according to law. It is

made clear that the investigating officer is under no obligation

to keep on waiting for the surrender of the petitioners.

7.

The application is dismissed.