Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member Services -- Sign up today and get free trial for one month.
Kerala High Court
Sunil.N.S vs State Of Kerala on 20 May, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 3403 OF 2024
CRIME NO.297/2017 OF NEDUMBASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN BAIL APPL. NO.7254 OF 2023 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:
SUNIL.N.S
AGED 34 YEARS
NEDUIVALIKKUDI, ELAMPAKKAPPILLY, VENGOOR,
KOOVAPPADY, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683544
BY ADV.
SRI.V.V.PRATHEEKSH KURUP
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3403 of 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3403 of 2024
-------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of May, 2024
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.297/2017 of Nedumbassery Police Station. The above case is pending before the Principal District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam as S.C.No.118/2018.
3. The prosecution case is that, in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy by a movie star who is the 8 th accused in this case, the petitioner/1 st accused, along with certain other accused, abducted and sexually assaulted the victim in this case, who is also a movie star, in a moving car. The offence alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 120 (B), 109, 342, 366, 354, 354 B, 357, 376 D, 201, 212 B.A.No.3403 of 2024 3 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The offence under Section 66E and 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is also alleged. The petitioner herein has been in custody in connection with the above case from 23.02.2017 onwards.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. This Court considered the bail applications filed by the petitioner on earlier occasions, and detailed orders were passed by this Court in those cases. One of the order was challenged before the Apex Court and the Apex Court also has not interfered with the order passed by this Court rejecting the bail application. The trial in this case is going on based on the directions issued by the Apex Court. I am of the considered opinion that there is no change of circumstance to consider the bail application of the petitioner who is the 1st accused in the case. Very serious allegations are there against the 1st accused. This point is considered B.A.No.3403 of 2024 4 by this Court in the earlier orders rejecting the bail applications. It is now settled by several decisions of this Court and the Apex Court that simply because the accused has been in custody for a long time, that itself is not a reason to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, there is no change of circumstance to consider this bail application.
Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE DM