High CourtsSingle Bench

Akshay. K vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 2 March 2018 · Citation: (2018) 03 KL CK 0090

HON’BLE JUDGES
Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 324, 452
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1239 Of 2018
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 · 501 words
1.

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

2.

The petitioner herein is the 4th accused in Crime No.93 of 2018 of Manjeshwar Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 452, 324 r/w Sec. 34 of the IPC.

3.

The prosecution allegation is that on 10.02.2018 at 4.40 p.m., the petitioners herein trespassed into the house of the brother of the de facto complainant and the 1st accused is alleged to have assaulted the de facto complainant with a stick causing injuries. The de facto complainant was dragged on to the portico and was assaulted thereafter. It is also alleged that the accused entered the house and committed mischief causing damages.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in so far as the petitioner herein is concerned, there is no specific allegation. Main overt acts all are attributed against the 1st accused. Though it is alleged that mischief was committed and damages were caused, the same has not been ascertained. The petitioner is person with no criminal antecedents according to the learned counsel.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer.

6.

I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary. Insofar as the petitioner herein is concerned, the allegation is that he was also present along with the rest of the accused. It does not appear that any specific overt act has been alleged against him. It is not reported that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents.

7.

Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the materials in support thereof, his antecedents and attendants facts, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted.

8.

In the result, this petition will stand allowed. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:

i)The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.

ii)The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

iii)The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.

iv) If the petitioner intends to leave India, he shall obtain previous permission from the court having jurisdiction.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.