High CourtsSingle Bench

Gopakumar vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 3 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 KL CK 0054

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324, 452
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8040 Of 2020
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

21 paragraphs · 441 words
1.

The applicant is the 1st accused in Crime No.2509 of 2020 of Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam, for having allegedly committed offences

punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 294(b), 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The prosecution case, in brief, is this:

2.

On 30.08.2020 at about 11.30 PM, the applicant along with the other four persons, formed an unlawful assembly and in the prosecution of the

common object of the said unlawful assembly and having made preparation, they trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted

him with dangerous weapons like axe, sword, sticks, etc., and caused injuries on him, which could have proved fatal and thus the applicant attempted

to commit culpable homicide. The reasons for the attack is that the defacto complainant had informed the Excise officials regarding the applicant being

involved in some drug case and in consequence of which even a raid was conducted in his house. But, there was nothing recovered from his house.

Irked by that act of the defacto complainant, the present assault was done by the applicant and the other co-accused. The applicant had approached

this Court for anticipatory bail vide order dated 04.11.2020 in B.A.No.6915 of 2020, the bail application was disposed of with a direction to the

applicant surrender before the investigating Officer within two weeks. He was allegedly arrested on 15.11.2020 and remanded to judicial custody. He

continues to remain in custody. The applicant states that he has no other criminal antecedents. And, therefore, he may be granted bail.

3.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the applicant

has no other records of criminal antecedents. The recovery is completed and therefore, further incarceration of the applicant may not be necessary.

Under the circumstances, I find that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

4.

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

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

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

(ii) He shall not intimidate or influence witnesses and tamper with evidence.

(iii) He 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.