High CourtsSingle Bench

Fazil vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 10 May 2024 · Citation: (2024) 05 KL CK 0065

HON’BLE JUDGES
Johnson John, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294(b), 323, 341, 353
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3750 Of 2024
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

16 paragraphs · 518 words

Johnson John, J

1.

This is an application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

The petitioners are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Crime No. 369 of 2024 of Feroke Police Station, registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 353, 294(b) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The prosecution case is that the de facto complainant was the driver of KSRTC bus bearing Registration No. KL-15-7794 and on 12.04.2024 at 1.10 p.m when the bus reached at Ramanattukara, the accused who were the driver and conductor of private bus bearing Registration No. KL-10-BD-3526 stopped the said private bus in front of the KSRTC bus and thereafter, uttered obscene words against the de facto complainant and the accused persons slapped the de facto complainant on his face and thereby obstructed him from discharging his duties as a public servant, and thereby committed the offences as aforesaid.

4.

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

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the petitioners are totally innocent and that it was the driver of the KSRTC bus, who drove the bus in a dangerous manner and attempted to hit on the private bus. It is stated that the petitioners never had any intention to restrain the de facto complainant from discharging his public duty. It is also stated that there is no necessity for any custodial interrogation in this case and that the petitioners are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor has no serious objection in granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, subject to stringent conditions.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that there is no necessity for any custodial interrogation and therefore, pre-arrest bail can be granted to the petitioners subject to conditions.

In  the  result,  this  application  is  allowed  on  the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting themselves for interrogation.

(ii) After interrogation, the petitioners shall be released on bail on the very same day on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigation Officer.

(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 369 of 2024 of Feroke Police Station, on every Saturday at 11.00 a.m. till the final report is filed.

(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(v) The petitioners shall not attempt to influence the defacto complainant or interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate any witness in Crime No. 369 of 2024 of Feroke Police Station;

(vi) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the above conditions are violated, the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 369 of 2024 of Feroke Police Station can file application before the jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.