Abdulla Kunji .K vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed by the 1st accused in Crime No. 283/2023 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Kasargod.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

I have perused the relevant documents form part of the case diary placed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

The prosecution case is that, when the 1st accused asked money from the defacto complainant, which was offered to be given as part of mediation effected by the 1st accused, there occurred a scuffle. Thereafter, the 2nd accused reached the place of occurance, beat on the shoulder of the defacto complainant by using a reaper and same caused fracture. There is allegation in the FIS that the 2nd accused wrongfully restrained and attacked the defacto complainant since, there was a scuffle in between the 1st accused, who is the brother of the 2nd accused and the defacto complainant prior to that. Pursuant to the occurance, crime alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 341 and 326 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, was registered.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner happened to be a mediator in a dispute in between the defacto complainant and a 3rd party. When the petitioner demanded the money as part of mediation, the defacto complainant opposed and there occurred a scuffle in between them. Subsequently, the 2nd accused reached there and beat the defacto complainant by using a reaper and same caused injuries including fracture. It is also argued that the prosecution has no case that the petitioner herein/ 1st accused did use any weapon to assault the defacto complainant and thereby caused injuries to the defacto complainant. It is submitted further that the 2nd accused is already arrested and the purpose of investigation including recovery, is practically over. Therefore, the petitioner is liable to be released on anticipatory bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor relying on the wound certificate submitted that the defacto complainant sustained five injuries and the 4th one is fracture of clavicle. Therefore, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

On perusal of the FIS and other records, even though, the defacto complainant sustained multiple injuries including clavicle fracture, there is no allegation for the prosecution that the 1st accused used any weapon or caused any serious injuries to the defacto complainant. However, the investigation shall go on. Therefore, the petitioner is liable to be released on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed and the petitioner can be enlarged on bail, on the following conditions:

i. The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioner. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioner before the jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself.

ii. On such production, the jurisdictional court shall release the petitioner on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) by himself and by two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

iiii. The petitioner shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so.

iv. The petitioner, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

v. The petitioner shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.