High Court Kerala High Court

Pradeeshkumar vs The State Of Kerala on 29 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
Pradeeshkumar vs The State Of Kerala on 29 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 2634 of 2008()


1. PRADEESHKUMAR,S/O. MADAHVAN NAMBIAR
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE C.I. OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :29/04/2008

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                     B.A. No. 2634 of 2008
            -------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 29th day of April, 2008

                               ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner

apprehends arrest as an accused in a crime registered under

Sec.395 of the IPC. The crime was of the year 2005.

Investigation is now complete. Final report has already been

filed. Cognizance has been taken. Committal proceedings

has been registered. Reckoning the petitioner as an

absconding accused, coercive processes have been issued

against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends imminent

arrest.

2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the petitioner is absolutely innocent. The petitioner is not

guilty of any offence alleged. There is some mistaken identity

which has prompted the police to make false allegations

B.A. No. 2634 of 2008 -: 2 :-

against the petitioner. The petitioner is willing to surrender

before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. The

learned counsel for the petitioner prays that identical directions

as were imposed in favour of the petitioner as per the order

dated 1.4.08 in B.A.No.1983/08 may be issued in favour of the

petitioner herein. I am satisfied that the said request can be

accepted.

3. In the result this bail application is dismissed; but with

the specific observation that if the petitioner surrenders before

the learned Magistrate and applies bail, after giving sufficient

prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned

Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in

accordance with law and expeditiously – on the date of surrender

itself.

4. The contention of the petitioner that he is not the

accused in question can, of course, be raised before the learned

Magistrate and appropriate orders sought at the appropriate

stage.

Sd/-



                                        (R. BASANT, JUDGE)


Nan/       //true copy//          P.S. to Judge

B.A. No. 2634 of 2008  -: 3 :-