Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Nasik P.P vs Sub Inspector Of Police on 4 September, 2013

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT:

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/29TH ASWINA, 1938

                   Crl.MC.No. 6858 of 2016 ()
                   ---------------------------
   CRIME NO. 1206/2013 OF KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION , KANNUR

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
---------------------

           NASIK P.P.
            S/O YOUSUF, AYISHAS, THAZHECHOVVA, THILANOOR P.O.,
            SANTHARAM ROAD, KANNUR DISTRICT.

           BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
------------------------------------

          1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
           KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION, KANNUR-670 001.

          2. STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031.

           R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: SMT AMBIKADEVI

       THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE    HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD  ON
21-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.MC.No. 6858 of 2016 ()




                            APPENDIX




PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
ANNEXUR A1:    COPY OF THE SAID COMMUNICATION DATED 4.9.2013.




RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL




                                                    True Copy /



                                                    P A to Judge



                      SUNIL THOMAS, J.
                     =================
                   Crl.M.C.No.6858 of 2016
                     =================
              Dated this the 21st day of October, 2016

                              ORDER

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1206 of 2013 of Kannur Town Police Station for offences punishable under sections 406 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1)(xii) and 3(2)

(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

2. The contention of the petitioner herein is that he was abroad and a fabricated case has been set up against him. Warrant of arrest is pending against the petitioner and he apprehends arrest. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to surrender before the Court and seek bail.

3. Opposing the above application, learned Special Prosecutor submitted that the case is of the year 2013, in which, there was an allegation of committing rape on a scheduled caste women on a promise to marry. Thereafter, he moved a bail application as B.A.No.6310 of 2013 in the above crime, which was dismissed by a detailed order by the Honourable Judge of this Court. It was after considering Annexure-A1 letter, purported to have been written by the de facto complainant and doubting the Crl.M.C.6858/16 2 genuineness of that letter. It is further seen from the case diary that a subsequent bail application was filed as B.A.No.7248 of 2016, which was withdrawn by the petitioner and hence, dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 01.12.2015. Petitioner has now come up with a plea that he was abroad and hence, he could not co-operate with the investigation.

4. Learned Special Prosecutor further submitted that since the petitioner herein was not available for interrogation and was absconding, a look out notice has been issued. In the above circumstance, I am convinced that this is not a fit case for granting any discretionary relief and also that this is nothing but an abuse of the process of law for evading the arrest.

Crl.M.C is hence dismissed.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS Judge Sbna/21/10/16 True Copy / P A to Judge