Manoj @ Issac vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 2491 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
                                       &
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
             Friday, the 4th day of March 2022 / 13th Phalguna, 1943

                 CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2022 IN CRL.A NO. 547 OF 2017

SESSIONS CASE NO.341/2016 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-III, MAVELIKKARA.

PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

        MANOJ @ ISSAC, MANOJ BHAVANAM @ PLAVILA VADAKKETHIL,THURUTHIMEL
        MURI, CHERIYANADU VILLAGE.

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

        STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
        KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN- 682 031.


     Application praying that in the circumstances stated therein
the High Court be pleased to grant interim bail to the petitioner for a
period of two weeks.




     This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY, Advocate for the
petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the respondent, the court passed
the following:




P.T.O
         K.VINOD CHANDRAN & C.JAYACHANDRAN, JJ.
         ------------------------------------
                  Crl.M.A No.1 of 2022
                           in
               Crl.Appeal No.547 of 2017
         -------------------------------------
         Dated this the 4th day of March, 2022


                           O R D E R

Jayachandran, J.

1. Petitioner/appellant is the third accused in

S.C.No.341/2016 of the Additional Sessions Court-

III, Mavelikkara. He is presently undergoing life

imprisonment pursuant to the judgment of

conviction, inter alia for offence under Section

302 of the Penal Code.

2. In the instant Crl.M.A, the petitioner seeks

suspension of the order of sentence and his

release on interim bail on the premise that his

marriage has not been registered under the Kerala

Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008.

The petitioner would aver that the marriage took

place on 24.6.2015 and that two children, aged 4

years and one year, are born in the wedlock.

According to the petitioner, his presence cannot

be dispensed with for registration of marriage,

wherefore, he seeks his release on interim bail. Crl.MA 1/22 in Crl.Appeal 547/17

3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor,

we are not inclined to allow the instant Crl.M.A.

We take note that the subject crime, which resulted

in the conviction of the petitioner along with

others, is the result of a gang war between two

groups. The petitioner is presently undergoing life

imprisonment, he having been found guilty of the

offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. We are not

convinced of the ground under which the petitioner

seeks suspension of sentence and release on interim

bail. We also take note that the marriage took place in the year 2015 and two children were born

in the wedlock. The judgment impugned was passed

only on 26.5.2017. Therefore, the petitioner, if

genuinely interested to get the marriage registered

as per the relevant rules, could have done it at

any time before the date of pronouncement of the

judgment. Seeking interim bail at this point of Crl.MA 1/22 in Crl.Appeal 547/17

time is nothing but a ruse to secure the release of

the petitioner. Resultantly, this Crl.M.A would

stand dismissed.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

C.JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE jg

04-03-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar