Prameela v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2015/1ST SRAVANA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 4281 of 2015 () ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Bail Appl. NO.3916/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED CRIME NO. 192/2015 OF ENATH POLICE STATION , PATHANAMTITTA PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

----------------------------

1. PRAMEELA , AGED 33 YEARS W/O.SAJEEV, KALLUVETTIYIL LEKSHAM VEEDU, MANNADY P.O. KADAMBANADU, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.(A1)

2. MUHAMMAD MUSTHAFA, AGED 47 YEARS MYTHEEN BAVA RAWTHER, KALLUVETTIYIL LEKSHAM VEEDU MANNADY P.O., KADAMBANADU, ADOOR PATHANAMTHITTA.(A3)

3. SHAJAHAN, AGED 47 YEARS S/O.MAJEED, KALLUVETTIYIL LEKSHAM VEEDU, MANNADY P.O. KADAMBANADU, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA.(A4)

4. ANSHAD ALI, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.SHOUKATH ALI, ANSHAD MANZIL, ENATHU, ADOOR PATHANAMTHITTA.(A11) BY ADVS.SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S SRI.B.SIBI SRI.NOBEL RAJU RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA REPRESENTING THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ENATHU PATHANAMTHITTA.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.REMA.R THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: dlk

K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No.4281 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2015

O R D E R

Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

2.

Petitioners are alleged to have committed the offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 427 and 506(1) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

The prosecution case is that they wrongfully restrained the victim and assaulted them, committed mischief and threatened them.

4.

Heard.

5.

The earlier application filed by the petitioners for the very same purpose, Bail Application No.2177 of 2015 was dismissed. The subsequent development pleaded is that three accused have already been granted anticipatory bail. The order is seen from Annexure-A5. They were granted anticipatory bail because they are senior citizens and there was no allegation that they were armed or they used any weapon. On the other hand, the petitioners took part in the assault and they are aged between 26 and 47.

B.A. No.4281 of 2015 The second bail application is not maintainable. In the result, this application is dismissed. sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE R.AV //True Copy// PA to Judge