Joyson Jose vs State Of Kerala

Shircy V, J

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 1128 of 2021 of Wadakkacherry Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 341, 323, 324, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, petitioners 1 and 2 who are arraigned as accused Nos. 2 and 4 have moved this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The prosecution allegation is that on 21.08.2021 at about 19.30 Hrs. the petitioners along with the other accused have trespassed into the residential house of the defacto complainant with deadly weapons such as sword, iron rod etc. and beaten the defacto complainant with the iron rod and hacked him with the sword and caused grievous injuries to him. They have also kicked him on his chest and stomach and also created a horrendous situation in the locality and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the 1st petitioner is a worker in BMS Trade Union in Poomala and the other accused are Congress party workers and the defacto complainant and his father are members of CITU and because of the political enmity, these petitioners and the other accused were falsely implicated in the case. They are totally innocent of the allegations levelled against them. But they apprehend arrest and hence this petition.

The learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed this application contending that three persons have sustained injuries in the attack by the petitioners and the other accused. It is also reported that the 1st petitioner, who is arraigned as the 2nd accused is involved in eight other cases of similar nature in various police stations in Thrissur District and the 2nd petitioner, who is the 4th accused is also having criminal antecedents as he is involved in three cases apart from this case registered before the Wadakkancherry Police Station as well Medical College Police Station.

A perusal of the documents produced before me by the learned Public Prosecutor would show that three persons have sustained grievous injuries in the attack by the petitioners and the other accused. The history and cause of injury have also been seen narrated by the injured to the doctor who treated them immediately after the alleged incident. All the accused persons who caused injuries to the injured are persons known to them. So, there is no question of identity of the accused involved in the case. The place of occurrence is the residential house of the defacto complainant. Along with him his two sons have also sustained grievous injuries.

Considering the nature of the injuries sustained by the defacto complainant, his sons, the seriousness and gravity of the offences alleged against the petitioners, and their criminal antecedents, I am constrained to conclude that they are not entitled for a favourable order for pre-arrest bail, by exercising the judicial discretion of this court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, this application deserves a dismissal. The petitioners could very well surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation of the case.

Dismissed.