High CourtsSingle Bench

Anu @Kochumon vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 13 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 KL CK 0081

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294(b), 308, 323
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 56 Of 2022
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

29 paragraphs · 498 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1740/2021 of Pooyapally Police Station, Kollam District alleging commission of offences under Sections

294(b), 323 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he attacked the de-facto complainant who is none other than his elder brother with a lamp and thereafter

with a iron pan causing injuries to him.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the elder brother of the petitioner and the petitioner were in enimical terms on account of the fact

that the elder brother of the petitioner was opposed to the father settling the tharavadu house in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that, on the

date of the incident, the elder brother of the petitioner, the de-facto complainant, entered into an argument with the father and when the petitioner

arrived there, the petitioner was attacked by the de-facto complainant and his wife with a chair. It is submitted that the petitioner only retaliated and

there was no intention, whatsoever, to carry out any attack on the de-facto complainant. Finally, it is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody

from 29.12.2021 and further detention of the petitioner is not necessary for the purpose of investigation into the case.

5.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor has taken me through the wound certificate in respect of the de-facto complainant and has pointed out the

seriousness of the injuries caused to the de-facto complainant. Reference is also made to the first information statement given by the de-facto

complainant.

7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, I am of the view that

the petitioner can be granted bail since his continued detention may not be necessary for the purpose of a proper investigation into Crime

No.1740/2021 of Pooyappally Police Station, Kollam District.

8.

In the result, this application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

Jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.1740/2021 of Pooyapally Police Station, Kollam District on every Saturday at 11.00 am till

the filing of final report in that crime;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de-facto complainant or influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.1740/2021 of

Pooyapally Police Station, Kollam District;

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.1740/2021 of Pooyapally Police Station, Kollam District may file

an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.