SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 16416

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
SIJO FENZER – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./2325/2022



Advocates:
RAFFEEKH.K

The court affirmed that serious allegations, including assaults on public officials, warrant the denial of anticipatory bail to prevent further offenses.

Headnote:

Bail - Anticipatory Bail - IPC Sections (353, 333, 341) - Kerala Police Act Sections (117(a), 117(e)) - Summary of the legal framework regarding anticipatory bail, highlighting the severity of allegations, the interpretation of relevant IPC and Kerala Police Act provisions, and the court's rationale against granting bail.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner faces multiple serious charges including assault on public officials and obstruction of justice. The police were investigating the petitioner regarding prior offenses, and during their inquiry at his home, he allegedly attacked the police, resulting in injuries.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations against the petitioner were severe and supported by evidence that indicated a pattern of violent behavior during police interactions, which justified the denial of anticipatory bail.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail considering the serious nature of the criminal charges and prior conduct.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the severity of the allegations and the potential for the petitioner to interfere with justice or re-offend weighed heavily against the granting of anticipatory bail.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the anticipatory bail applications.

ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail.

2. B.A.No.2322 of 2022 related to Crime No.291 of

2021 of Agali Police Station, Palakkad District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 353 , 333 and 34 of IPC and Section 117 (e) of Kerala Police Act .

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on

30.05.2021, on 16.10.2021 at 6.30 pm the police party went to the house of the petitioner to enquire about the petitioner, who is an accused in Crime No.156/2021 of Agali Police Station. That time, allegedly the petitioner escaped from the scene by attacking the police officers.

4. B.A.No.2325 of 2022 related to Crime No.156 of

2021 of Agali Police Station, Palakkad District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 341 , 353 of IPC and Section 117 (a) of Kerala Police Act .

5. The prosecution case in brief is that on

30.05.2021, at 9.45 am the complainant civil police officer who was on duty at Mukkali, the accused was riding a two wheeler bearing registration No.KL 51 L 8032 and the complainant stopped the vehicle of the petitioner. The allegation is that when the petitioner was stopped by the complainant, the petitioner had caught hold of the collar of the complainant's shirt and pulled him down.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

7. Petitioner contended that he is falsely implicated the above said crimes.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted that the offences alleged against the petitioner is very severe including obstruction caused to the public servant while on duty and that as per the allegation in Crime No.291 of 2021, the petitioner attacked and that in the said incident the defacto complainant sustained fracture and the 2nd accused also attacked the defacto complainant. It is also submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that petitioner is involved in other cases, Crime No.156 of 2021 of Agali Police Station alleging the offences punishable u/Ss.341, 353, 332 of IPC and S.117 of K.P Act and also Crime No.219 of 2020 of Agali Police Station alleging the offences punishable u/Ss.325, 1(B)(a)of Arms Act.

Taking into consideration the serious nature of the allegation raised against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the above bail applications are dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top