Kerala High Court
Balu vs State Of Kerala on 30 May, 2017
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAYOF MAY 2017/9TH JYAISHTA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 3287 of 2017 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 443/2017 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
........
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------
BALU,
S/O PAVITHRAN, AGED 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT PONATH HOUSE,
KUZHUPILLY VILLAGE, MUNAMBAM.
BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
----------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION,
THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J
-----------------------------------
B.A. No.3287 of 2017
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of May, 2017
O R D E R
~~~~~~
1.This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is preferred by the accused in Crime No.443 of 2017 of Munambam Police Station. The Crime has been registered alleging offence punishable under Section 441, 324, 326, 294(b) and 506(ii) of the IPC.
2.Prosecution allegation is that on 29.3.2017 at 4.30 p.m., the petitioner herein trespassed into the fishing boat where the de facto complainant is working and assaulted him with an iron rod. Medical records reveal that the de facto complainant had sustained a fracture to his nasal bone.
3.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent.
4.Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand, would B.A.No. 3287/2017 2 contend otherwise.
5.I have considered the submissions advanced. Having gone though the nature of injuries sustained by the de facto complainant and other facts and circumstances, it does not appear to me that this Court will be justified in granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
6.However, at this stage, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner prays that petitioners be permitted to surrender before the investigating officer and to co-operate with the investigation. If the petitioner is so advised, he may surrender before the investigating officer, who shall interrogate the petitioner. If arrest of the petitioner is found to be necessary, the investigating officer shall thereafter produce him before the jurisdictional Magistrate within the statutory period. On such production, if an application for bail is filed, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass B.A.No. 3287/2017 3 appropriate orders, expeditiously. This application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.
sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE ps/31/6/17