High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
LATHEEF P.P., AGED 33 YEARS v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Bail Appl No. 6056 of 2006  RD-KL 1050 (11 October 2006)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMBail Appl No. 6056 of 2006()
1. LATHEEF P.P., AGED 33 YEARS,
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.SAJEEV
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.M.JAMES
O R D E R
J.M.JAMES, J.B.A. 6056/2006
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2006
O R D E RThe petitioner is before this Court, under Section 438 Cr.P.C, as he is accused of the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and also under Section 3 read with 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, in crime No.165/2006 of Varantharappilly Police Station.
2. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, who is an accused in another case under the Explosives Substances Act, was in possession of country made local firearm and shot at the defacto complainant, on the allegation that the defacto complainant had trespassed into the property and collected crump rubber pieces from the collecting vessel, fitted to the rubber tree.
3. However, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a handicaped person, as his lower portion, below the elbow of the right hand, is amputed and he is having fifty percent of disability. It is therefore, B.A.6056/2006 2 submitted that the allegations, made against him, are false.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the giving of an order under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The materials that are placed from the C.D file also show that the petitioner is having interest in handling firearms and using explosive substances. Of course, it is for the petitioner to disprove the same during the trial.
5. In the above facts situation, I am not inclined to grant a pre-arrest order, under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
6. The petitioner may work out his own remedy, according to the law. The application is dismissed as above. J.M.JAMES
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.