Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.K.ANEESH, AGED 29 YEARS versus THE S.I. OF POLICE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.K.ANEESH, AGED 29 YEARS v. THE S.I. OF POLICE - Bail Appl No. 4747 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 15006 (6 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 4747 of 2007()

1. K.K.ANEESH, AGED 29 YEARS,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE S.I. OF POLICE,
... Respondent

2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE

For Petitioner :SMT.K.V.RESHMI

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :06/08/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

= = = = = = = = = = = = = B.A.No.4747 of 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 6th day of August, 2007

ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the 2nd accused in the crime registered under 353 IPC. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner along with co-accused deterred a Police constable who was discharging his official duty. The petitioner was allegedly involved in the offence of illicit removal of sand in an auto rickshaw. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The victim could not specify the details of the petitioner at that time. Subsequent investigation revealed the identity of the petitioner. He has been arrayed as the 2nd accused. He apprehends imminent arrest.

2. According to the petitioner he is absolutely innocent. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that false allegations are being raised against the petitioner. At any rate, considering the nature of the allegations, anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner, prays the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. Investigation is not complete. The petitioner has to be arrested and interrogated. There is absolutely no circumstance in this case justifying invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under B.A.No.4747 of 2007 2 Section 438, submits the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. There are no features suggesting the need for invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This is a fit case where the petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail in the ordinary and normal course.

5. In the result, this petition is dismissed. I may however, hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and apply for bail,after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

sj /TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.