Akhil vs State Of Kerala

This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.270/2021 of Nagarur Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 294(b), 506, 452 and 427 of IPC.

The prosecution case is that on 20.02.2021, at around 3 p.m., the petitioner trespassed into the residence of the de facto complainant and showered abuses on her and threatened her with fear of death by showing a chopper. The petitioner also committed mischief at the residence of the de facto complainant by causing damage to the tune of of Rs.10,000/- to the de facto complainant.

The case of the petitioner is that the son of the de facto complainant, who is a friend of the petitioner, had borrowed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from him. The petitioner demanded the son of the de facto complainant to return the money. He refused to pay the money back. On the date of the occurrence, the petitioner went to the residence of the de facto complainant for the purpose of demanding the money. A scuffle occurred and thereafter the de facto complainant filed a false complaint against the petitioner leading to the registration of this crime. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations levelled against him.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the weapon allegedly used for the commission of the offence is to be recovered for which custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required.

Having gone through the entire materials, I am of the view that there is some doubt as to the genuineness of the allegations levelled against the petitioner. There is no possibility of the petitioner to flee from justice. Considering the entire circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner could establish a prima facie case for getting the benefits contemplated in Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Though this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Section 438 Cr.P.C., the apprehension of the learned Public Prosecutor that uninterrupted investigation of the case may be affected if the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not facilitated, cannot be lost sight of. Deducing the broad principles for granting pre-arrest bail as provided under Section 438 Cr.P.C the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and another v. State of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1632) held that while granting relief under Section 438(1) Cr.P.C, appropriate conditions can be imposed under sub-section 2 so as to ensure an uninterrupted investigation. It was held that one of such conditions can even be that in the event of the police making out a case of a likely discovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the person released on bail shall be liable to be taken in police custody for facilitating the discovery.

In the result, this Bail Application is allowed as follows :-

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 07.05.2021, for interrogation.

(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating agency.

(iii) The Station House Officer, Nagarur Police Station is directed to release the petitioner, on bail, in the event, he is arrested, on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.

(iv) The petitioner should surrender himself to the Police for a brief period if a discovery is to be made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

(v) The petitioner shall not influence the witnesses in this case or tampering with the evidence.