High CourtsSingle Bench

Arshad vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 January 2023 · Citation: (2023) 01 KL CK 0252

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 323, 427, 452, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 530 Of 2023
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 · 508 words

Ziyad Rahman A.A., J

1.

The petitioner is the 1st accused in crime No.29/2023 of Ayiroor Police Station, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 452, 323, 506 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The prosecution case is that on 07.01.2023 at 00.45 hours, the petitioner, along with the other accused persons, trespassed into the residence of the defacto complainant, abused her and her son and also assaulted them with weapons. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the investigation on 07.01.2023 and has been under judicial custody since then. This application is submitted in such circumstances seeking regular bail.

3.

Sri. M.L. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. According to him, there was a proposal for the marriage between the son of the defacto complainant and the daughter of the 3rd accused. Later, there arose some differences of opinion between the parties, and the accused went to the residence to settle the said matter, and the incident occurred during the said settlement talks. According to the petitioner, he only accompanied the 3rd accused to enable the parties to arrive at a settlement.

4.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the said contention. It is pointed out that the investigation is ongoing, and the weapons are to be recovered. Therefore, it is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to influence the witnesses and thereby hamper the investigation.

5.

After going through the records, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted bail. This is particularly because the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 07.01.2023 onwards. The interrogation of the petitioner is over, and I do not find any justifiable reason to continue the petitioner's detention. As far as the apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor is concerned, the same can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions.

In such circumstances, the bail application is allowed. The petitioner is granted bail and is directed to be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

1.

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

2.

The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation.

3.

The Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11 a.m. every Wednesday until the filing of the final report. The petitioner shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

4.

The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.

5.

The petitioner shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

6.

The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.