Akhil vs State Of Kerala

Viju Abraham, J

This is an application for regular bail.

The Petitioner is arrayed as the Sole accused in Crime No. 304/2021 of Kattoor Police Station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 452, 307, 294(b) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that on 09.06.2021 at about 9.00 p.m., the applicant committed criminal trespass to the house of the brother of the complainant namely Valsan situated in Edakulam with an intention to commit his murder, abused him in filthy language, criminally intimidated him and stabbed him with a knife and thereby committed the abovesaid offences.

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

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid crime and further submitted that the petitioner was arrested on 10/06/2021 and he is in custody since then and further that though he moved an application for bail before this court in BA No.3673/2022 , the same was dismissed as per Annexure A1 order dated 06/07/2022. It is further submitted that the allegation does not constitute any offence under the above sections of Indian Penal Code as alleged and the final report is already filed and further detention of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of the investigation.

The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the application for bail mainly contending that the brother of the defacto complainant was seriously injured in the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the petitioner inflicted stab injury on the chest of the injured. In the alleged attack the injured suffered injuries on the chest and lungs and he was in the ventilator. The doctor who examined the injured opined that the injuries sustained by him is 5 cm deep. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that the petitioner is involved in several other criminal cases of serious nature including offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is also revealed that petitioner is accused in Crime No.581/2020 of Kattoor Police Station in which offences punishable under Sections 302 of IPC is also incorporated. He was released on bail by this court on a specific condition that he shall not get involved in any other criminal cases and that in violation of the same he is involved in the present crime and pursuant to the same the Additional Sessions Court, Irinjalakuda has cancelled the bail in Crime No.581/2020 of Kattoor Police Station. The details of the cases in which the petitioner is involved is given below:

Kattoor Police Station, Crime No.192/2018, under Sections 341, 323, 326, 294(b), 505(i) and 308 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Kattoor Police Station, Crime No.211/2018, under Sections 341, 323, 294(b) and 308 of the Indian Penal Code.

Kattoor Police Station, Crime No.581/2020, under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 427, 506(ii), 341, 294(b), 324, 326, 307, 302 and 120(B) r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

Kattoor Police Station, Crime No.306/2021, under Sections 452, 506(i) and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

Kattoor Police Station, Crime No.304/2021, under Sections 294(b), 506(2), 452, 427 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned Public Prosecutor relied on the judgment in Neeru Yadav V. State of U.P and Another 2015 KHC 4650. Paragraph 15 of the said judgment is extracted below:

“This being the position of law, it is clear as cloudless sky that the High Court has totally ignored the criminal antecedents of the accused. What has weighed with the High Court is the doctrine of parity. A history - sheeter involved in the nature of crimes which we have reproduced hereinabove, are not minor offences so that he is not to be retained in custody, but the crimes are of heinous nature and such crimes, by no stretch of imagination, can be regarded as jejune. Such cases do create a thunder and lightening having the effect potentiality of torrential rain in an analytical mind. The law expects the judiciary to be alert while admitting these kind of accused persons to be at large and therefore, the emphasis is on exercise of discretion judiciously and not in a whimsical manner.”

Paragraph 19 of the judgment is extracted below:

“Resultantly, the appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High Court is set aside. If the respondent no.2 is at large, he shall be taken into custody forthwith, and if he is still in custody because of certain other cases, he shall not be admitted to bail in connection with the present case. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion with regard to other cases and simultaneously we also clearly state that our observations in this case are only meant for purpose of setting aside the order granting bail and would have no impact or effect during the trial.”

The present crime in which the petitioner is involved, is serious in nature. The petitioner is involved in several other criminal cases including one punishable under Section 302 of IPC. Though he was granted bail in that case, he got involved in this case and two other cases in violation of the conditions imposed while granting bail he shall not get involved any other criminal cases. This court has earlier dismissed the bail application of the petitioner as per Annexure-A1 order.

Considering the serious antecedents of the petitioner and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence committed, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Bail application fails and is accordingly dismissed.