Sreekanth and others v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2014/30TH PHALGUNA, 1935** ## **Crl.MC.No. 1754 of 2014 ()** **--------------------------CRIME NO. 166/2014 OF KOIPURAM POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT -----------------------------------PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3 & 5 TO 16 : --------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. SREEKANTH, AGED 27 YEARS,** **S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, SREERANGAM, KURUNGAZHA, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. VINEETH KUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN,** **SASTHAMPURATHU, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA 3. MANEESH.N.M., AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. MONACHAN,** **NEDUMPARAMBIL, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. SURESH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. SOMAN PILLAI,** **ARIVUKUZHI, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **5. MANEESH, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. MOHANAN NAIR,** **MELEDATHU, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA** **6. MAHESH MADHU, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O. MADHU PARACKAL, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA** **7. CHICKOO @ LIBIN, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O.PRADEEP,** **DWARAKA, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA. 8. LIJO VARGHESE, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.JOY,** **PULICKAL PUTHENPURAYIL, PATTAKKALA, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA 9. ARURAJ, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. RAJAN,** **TRIKKUNNATHU KALAYIL, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **10. SURESH, AGED 28 YEARS, KANALANJICKAL,** **KURUVANKUZHI, PATHANAMTHITTA 11. SUNIL GOPI, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.GOPI,** **KANJIRAPPARA THADATHIL, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **12. SIJO RAGHU MUTTUMAN, AGED 18 YEARS,** **S/O. RAGHU, PARACKAL HOUSE, PULLAD, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **2/-** **sts** **-2-** ## **CRMC.NO.1754/2014** **13. MAHESH CHANDRAN, AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. CHANDRAN, THEKKEDATHU HOUSE, MUTTUMAN, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **14. GOLDI GEORGE, AGED 20 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE NINAN, NELLICKAL HOUSE, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA.** **15. NITHIN SUDHAKAR, AGED 24 YEARS, ALUMTHARA KOLLAMPARAMBIL, KURUNGAZHA, PATHANAMTHITTA.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU** ## **RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER:** **----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** ## **1. STATE OF KERALA,** **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,** **HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,PIN-682 031.** **2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOIPURAM POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN-689 531.** ## **R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S.HYMA** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** **CRMC.NO.1754/2014** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:** **ANNEX A1 COPY OF THE RULING IN SUKWANT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB REPORTED IN (2009) 7 SCC559** **ANNEX A2 COPY OF THE RULING IN MUKESH KISHNAPURIA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL REPORTED IN 2010(5) SCR 702.** ## **RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.S.TO.JUDGE** **sts** ## K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J. x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x Crl.M.C. No. 1754 of 2014 x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x Dated this the 21[st] day of March, 2014 **==> picture [96 x 10] intentionally omitted <==** This is an application filed by the petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 16 in Crime No. 166/2014 on the file of the Koyipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta District to give direction to the Magistrate to consider and dispose of the bail application on the date of filing itself under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioners are accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 16 in Crime No. 166/2014 of Koyipuram Police Station which was registered on the basis of the statement given by the de facto complainant alleging offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. The 4[th] petitioner is a minor and he has been falsely implicated in the case due to political rivalry. Though the petitioners filed an application for anticipatory bail before this Court as B.A. No. 1648/2014, that application was later withdrawn. Petitioners intend to surrender either before the Investigating Officer or before the Magistrate and apply for regular bail with an application for interim bail. However, the petitioners apprehend that the Magistrate will not grant bail on the date of filing the Crl.M.C. No. 1754 of 2014 2 application itself and the orders will not be passed on those applications as well. So the petitioners have no other remedy except to approach this Court seeking the following reliefs: “i) Direct the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Pathanamthitta to consider either the application for regular bail or the application for interim bail on the date of filing the application itself in Crime No. 166/2014 of Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. ii) Grant two weeks time to the petitioner to surrender before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, in Crime No. 166 of 2014 of Koipuram Police Station, Pathanamthitta District, or before the investigating officer in the said crime and for applying for bail. iii) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case”. 3. Considering the reliefs claimed in the petition, this Court felt that the petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. Counsel for the petitioners relied on the decision reported in **Sukhwant Singh** v. **State of Punjab** [2009 (3) KHC 465] and **Mukesh Kishan Puria** v **State of West Bengal** [2010 (15) SCC) 154] in support of their submissions. Crl.M.C. No. 1754 of 2014 3 5.The application was opposed by the Public Prosecutor. 6. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 to 16 in Crime No. 166/2014 of Koyipuram Police Station and they were not arrested so far and the investigation is in the primitive stage. It is also admitted in the petition itself that they filed an application for anticipatory bail before this Court as B.A.No. 1648/2014 and the same was later withdrawn. They want to surrender before the Court. But their apprehension is that if they surrender, their bail application will not be considered and disposed of by the court below on the date of filing itself. 7. There is no dispute regarding the principles laid down in the decisions reported in **Sukhwant Singh** v. **State of Punjab** [2009 (3) KHC 465] and **Mukesh Kishan Puria** v **State of West Bengal** [2010 (15) SCC) 154]. But at the same time, it is for the Presiding Officer concerned to consider the circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioners in the commission of crime etc. at the time of considering the bail application for granting or not granting bail in the case. So those matters can be considered and discretion can be exercised only by the Court before whom the case is pending. Crl.M.C. No. 1754 of 2014 4 8. The apprehension of the petitioners that if they surrender before the concerned Magistrate court, and move for bail, their applications will not be considered and they will be remanded is without any basis and not genuine because the Presiding Officers of criminal courts are expected to consider and dispose of the bail applications filed by the accused persons on their surrender on the date of filing itself, as far as possible, unless compelling circumstances warrant the postponement of the passing of the orders to a future date. So there is no necessity to issue any direction to the Magistrate as sought for in the petition. However, considering the apprehension mentioned in the petition, this Court feels that the petition can be disposed of as follows: If the petitioners surrender before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Pathanamthitta and move for bail in Crime No. 166/2014 of Koyipuram Police Station at Pathanamthitta District, then the learned Magistrate is directed to consider and dispose of the bail applications if any filed, after hearing the Assistant Public Prosecutor of that Court, in accordance with law as far as possible on the date of filing of the application itself. Crl.M.C. No. 1754 of 2014 5 With the above direction and observation the petition is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order the concerned Court immediately. Sd/- ## **K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE** rka /true copy/