Kerala High Court
Anuroop Pallitharayil vs State Of Kerala on 8 December, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 10594 OF 2023
CRIME NO.1863/2023 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMC 2510/2023 OF DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
CRMC 2511/2023 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 4:
1 ANUROOP PALLITHARAYIL
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O.VELAPPAN, UDAYAMPEROOR,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682307
2 CHANTHU ALIAS SREEJITH M.S.
AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.SATHYAN,
MANTHARAYIL HOUSE, PANACKAL ROAD,
THEKKUMBHAGAM, NADAMA,
THRIPUNITHURA, PIN - 682301
3 RAGESH M.R.
AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.S.RAJAN,
MARATTASSERIYIL, N.F.GATE, NADAMA,
THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682301
4 RAJA ALIAS RAJESH KUMAR K.S.
AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN S.D.,
KUNNALAKKADU HOUSE, JAYANTHI ROAD,
MARADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682304
BY ADVS.
P.V.ANILKUMAR
D.SARITHA
MANU MURALI T.
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
SRI. M.C. ASHI, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.10594/2023
..2..
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J.
---------------------
B.A.No. 10594/2023
---------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of December, 2023
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, seeking pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime
No.1863/2023 of Hill Palace Police Station, Ernakulam District, for
having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 308,
323, 324, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that on 19/08/2023, the petitioners
entered into a restaurant run by the defacto complainant Mr.Roy Kurian
situated at Thripunithura, Ernakulam. Thereafter, the petitioners/accused
1 to 4 using obscene language against the workers in the restaurant and
threatened them. Thereafter one of the petitioner snatched the mobile
phone of the defacto complainant and accused No.1 caused hurt. to the
defacto complainant with the help of a stone, and thereafter destroyed the
mobile phone of the defacto complainant and they were using obscene
language against the defacto complainant and thereby committed the
offence.
..3..
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
5. Considering the allegation against the petitioners of having
inflicted multiple head injuries as evident from the wound certificate, it
cannot be said that the offences are not attracted, I am not inclined to
grant anticipatory bail as it will affect a proper investigation. Therefore,
the following directions are issued:-
If the petitioners surrender before the Investigating Officer in two
weeks, they shall be interrogated and thereafter, shall be produced before
the Magistrate having jurisdiction on the date of surrender itself. If the
petitioners move for bail, the court below shall, untrammelled by any of
the observations in this order, consider the bail application on merits as
expeditiously as possible. If the petitioners do not surrender before the
Investigating Officer, as directed above, the Investigating Officer will be
free to arrest the petitioners as if no order has been passed in this case.
The bail application is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
APA
