Ayinelly Pocker And Ors vs State Of Kerala

The applicants are accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 in Crime No.896 of 2020 of Mannarkkad Police Station, Palakkad, for having allegedly committed

offences punishable under Sections 323, 353 and 307 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

On 09-11-2020 at about 12.20 PM, based on a complaint filed by the 1st accused before this Court, the S.H.O of Mannarkkad Police Station came

there to conduct an inquiry. The dispute was regarding the construction of a Temple Arch near the property of the 1st applicant. During the inquiry by

the Police officers, the applicants allegedly got wild and attacked him with dangerous weapons like knuckle duster and pelted stones at them, causing

hurt to them and thereby even attempted to commit murder. The S.H.O. of Mannarkkad Police station is the defacto complainant. The crime was

registered and the applicants were arrested on 09-11-2020 and remanded to judicial custody. They continue in remand.

The applicants state that the allegations are not true.

And that, it was the Police officer, who was violent and committed mischief by causing damage to the motorcycle which was parked in the property

of the accused. It is also stated that only minor injuries were caused to the S.H.O. in the scuffle that ensued. Even the wife of the 1st accused

sustained some injuries for which she had to be treated in the hospital. And, therefore, they seek bail.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and also the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that

Police protection was demanded by the 1st applicant before this Court and that was accorded by this Court. And, in consequence of that, the S.H.O.

had gone for inquiry. But, the applicants turned violent and attacked the Police party causing injuries to all of them. It is stated that there was stone

pelting and knuckle duster was also used by the 3rd accused. The 4th accused pelted stones at him. There is no specific allegation against the 1st

accused. The 2nd accused allegedly caught hold of the Police Officer by his collar. There is no offence under Sections 332 or 333 IPC incorporated in

the F.I.R. I am at loss to understand how an offence under Section 307 IPC would be attracted without the applicants using any dangerous or deadly

weapons. In view of the fact that the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents and that they have been in custody since 09-11-2020, no

purpose would be served by their further incarceration.

In the result, the application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on the execution of bonds for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty

thousand only), each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following further

conditions:

(i) They shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for.

(ii) Since a tense situation prevails in the locality, the applicants shall not enter the jurisdictional limits of the Mannarkkad Police Station for a period of

two months or till filing of the final report whichever is earlier, except for the purpose of exercising their right of the franchise during the impending

election.

(iii) They shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

(iv) They shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail period.

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

The bail application is allowed.