High CourtsSingle Bench

Abdul Fahad vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 KL CK 0185

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kauser Edappagath, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 364(A), 365, 368, 370, 386, 427, 452, 506(ii) · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 2363 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 549 words
1.

Both these applications are filed u/s 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

2.

The petitioner in B.A.No.2363 of 2021 is accused No.5 and the petitioner in B.A.No.3212 of 2021 is accused No.7 in Crime No.271/2021 of Mannar Police Station. The offences alleged are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 506(ii), 427, 364(A), 365, 368, 370, 386 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

The prosecution case in short is that on 22.2.2021 at 1.30 a.m., the petitioners along with the other accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of getting gold trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant, broke open the doors of the house and threatened the inhabitants, demanded gold and further threatened that if the gold is not given, all in the house will be killed and thereafter abducted the wife of the de facto complainant, namely Bindhu, and physically assaulted the mother of the de facto complainant and thereby committed the offence.

4.

Heard both sides and perused the case diary.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are absolutely innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that there are no materials to connect the petitioners with the alleged crime and hence they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications. He contended that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the petitioners and if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, it would affect the course of investigation.

6.

Perusal of the case diary would reveal that prima facie there are materials on record to connect the petitioners with the crime. However, the petitioner in B.A.No.2363 of 2021 was arrested on 23.2.2021 and the petitioner in B.A.No.3212 of 2021 was arrested on 5.3.2021. In view of the nature of the crime and the stage of investigation, I do not find any reason to hold that the continued detention of the petitioners is required for any purpose. The investigation seems to have reached a fair stage. No serious overt act has been alleged against the petitioners. For all these reasons, the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail on conditions.

In the result, both these applications are allowed on the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The petitioners shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Saturday until further orders. The petitioners shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required by him.

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioners shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioners shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.