Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

RENJITH, AGED 22, S/O.GOPALAN versus STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


RENJITH, AGED 22, S/O.GOPALAN v. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY - Bail Appl No. 5376 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 17060 (10 September 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 5376 of 2007()

1. RENJITH, AGED 22, S/O.GOPALAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.R.T.PRADEEP

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :10/09/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

B.A.No.5376 of 2007

Dated this the 10th day of September 2007

O R D E R

Application for regular bail. The petitioner is the fourth accused. He faces allegations inter alia under Sections 302 and 307 I.P.C. The alleged incident took place on 19/10/2006. The petitioner's arrest was recorded on 10/07/2007. He continues in custody from that date.

2. The earlier application for regular bail filed by the petitioner was dismissed by order dated 10/8/2007 with the observation that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court for bail again at later stages not prior to 24/8/2007. Accordingly this application has been filed on 24/8/2007. I have already adverted to facts in detail in the earlier order dated 10/8/2007. This order is to be read in continuation of that order. I am not hence adverting to facts in detail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has a history of criminal antecedents. The petitioner was arrested only on 10/7/2007. B.A.No.5376/07 2 Investigation is not complete. It is too early to consider the prayer for release of the petitioner on bail favourably now. The investigating officer in a crime like this may be granted some further time to complete the investigation.

3. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am not persuaded to agree that the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail at this stage. The investigators, I am satisfied, may be given some further time to complete the investigation.

4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. However, I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move this court for bail again at later stages of the investigation not, at any rate, prior to 24/09/2007. The investigating officer shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge B.A.No.5376/07 3 B.A.No.5376/07 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007


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.