Akash A vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

The first accused in crime No.132/2023 of Valappatanam police station, Kannur, seeks anticipatory bail in this petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C., for short).

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 at about 10.45 pm on 04.02.2023, accused Nos.1 to 5, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, with knowledge that they are all members of the said assembly, after sharing common object, armed with deadly weapons, to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder of the defacto complainant and his friend, while they were returning back to their house after witnessing the festival of Kadalayi Sreekrishna Temple. Then they assaulted the defacto complainant and his friend. The specific allegation is that the first accused attempted to cause cut injury on the neck of the defacto complainant by using a sword stick and when the same was restrained, the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Further allegation is that accused No.2 also used a sword to assault the defacto complainant and accused Nos.3 and 4 used iron pipes to assault them. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 506(ii) and 308 read with Section 149 of IPC.

While pressing for anticipatory bail to the first accused, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and the allegations are false. According to him, due to political rivalry, the petitioner got arrayed as an accused. The learned counsel for the petitioner offered co-operation in the matter of investigation while pursuing the relief of anticipatory bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor strongly opposed bail on the submission that arrest, custodial interrogation and recovery of sword stick at the instance of the petitioner, in a case where Mr.Akash and Mr.Kiran sustained very serious injuries, are absolutely necessary. The copies of wound certificate of Akash and Kiran were given much emphasis by the learned Public Prosecutor to establish the injuries and the truth of the prosecution allegations.

On perusal of the case records, the specific allegation against the petitioner is that he used a sword stick to assault Akash and Kiran. In the wound certificate of Akash, the following injuries noted.

Akash

Tenderness, contusion & abrasion over the face, nose (R) cheek

lacerated wound over (R) parietal region – (5x2x1 cm)

Incised wound over (L) forearm (6 x 1x 1 cm

Comminuted fracture nasal bone

Similarly, in the wound certificate of Kiran, the following injuries noted.

Lacerated wound over (L) parietal region (5x2x1 cm)

Tenderness & abrasion over (R) wrist

Tenderness & contusion cervical spine

Going by the injuries, it could be noticed that Akash and Kiran sustained multiple injuries and Akash sustained comminuted fracture on nasal bone, a grievous injury. Thus, the prosecution allegation as to commission of the above offences is well made out and in such a case, grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner cannot be justified for any reason, since the same would hamper the investigation. No doubt, arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary, as rightly pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor. Therefore, this petition deserves dismissal and accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.