Kerala High Court
Sakeer K.P vs State Of Kerala on 29 April, 2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 5241 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:33223
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 9TH VAISAKHA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 5241 OF 2025
CRIME NO.324/2023 OF AMBALATHARA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.6802 OF
2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED :
SAKEER K.P, AGED 34 YEARS
S/O ABDULLA KUNHI, EROLE HOUSE,
CHATTAMCHAL, THEKKIL VILLAGE,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671 541.
BY ADVS.
SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
S.SURAJA
MUHAMMED SUHAIR C.A
ABHILASH C.V.
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
AMBALATHARA POLICE STATION,
KASARGOD DISTRICT - PIN 671 316.
SR PP- VIPIN NARAYAN A
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.04.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 5241 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:33223
P. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
......................................................
B.A. No.5241 of 2025
...................................................
Dated this the 29th day of April, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. This Court had earlier directed the petitioner to approach the trial court for
bail. On 02.04.2025, the trial court dismissed the application for bail
submitted by the petitioner. It is observed in paragraph Nos.14 & 15 of the
order, which reads as follows:-
"14. On 15.10.2024 the trial was rescheduled to 02.12.2024 and
03.12.2024 considering the convenience of defence counsel. On 7 March
2025, CW1 was present before the court. However, the defence counsel
sought an adjournment, and the counsel appeared for the accused,
requesting that the case be posted after 17.03.2025.
15. This court commenced the trial and was ready to dispose of the case.
However, on two occasions, as per the accused's counsel's request, the
matter was adjourned. This is not a case where the accused was
detained in jail without any steps being taken to record the evidence.
The delay, if any, was caused by the defence counsel's failure to cross-
BAIL APPL. NO. 5241 OF 2025
2025:KER:33223
examine the witness. Furthermore, only CW1 remains to be examined,
and this court is ready to dispose of the case as early as possible.
Therefore, there is no merit in the argument that a delay in concluding
the case would increase the probability of detention for 604 days, making
him entitled to bail. The case laws presented by the petitioner are not
applicable, given the accused's conduct and the fact that only one witness
remains to be examined."
3. The contraband involved in this case is commercial quantity. The petitioner
is involved in five other cases, and one among them is for an offence
punishable under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act.
4. Considering the nature of the crime, the manner in which the petitioner is
alleged to have been involved in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned
above, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be released on bail at this
stage.
The bail application is accordingly dismissed.
sd/-
P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JUDGE
AMV/29/04/2025
BAIL APPL. NO. 5241 OF 2025
2025:KER:33223
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 5241/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.06.2024 IN
B.A.NO. 1820 OF 2024 PASSED BY THIS
HONOURABLE COURT
ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.09.2024 IN
B.A.NO. 6802 OF 2024 PASSED BY THIS
HONOURABLE COURT
ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER THIS HON'BLE COURT
DATED 18.03.2025 IN B.A.NO. 3508/2025
ANNEXURE A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.04.2025
PASSED BY THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT
KASARAGOD IN CRL.M.P NO 1763/2025
