Justin Joseph vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the 2nd accused in Crime No.1594/2023 registered by the Karukachal Police Station, Kottayam alleging the accused to have committed the offences under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 20.11.2023.

The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows: the accused 1 to 6 formed an unlawful assembly with the common object of attacking the defacto complainant and others. On 19.11.2023 at about 6.40 p.m., the 1st  accused hacked CW1 on his back with a knife and pushed him down in the compound of a Church at Karukachal. Two other persons were also stabbed and the accused persons pushed down one Jinu Jose who fell down and sustained serious injuries on his head. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.Sarath Babu Kottakkal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the accusations leveled against him. Even going by the allegations in Annexure A1 FIR, there is no overt act alleged against the petitioner. The accused 3 to 6 have already been enlarged on bail by the Court of Session, Kottayam in Crl.M.P. Nos.3477/2023 and 3499/2023 on 05.12.2023 and 12.12.2023, respectively. The petitioner is entitled to a similar order. It is only because the petitioner moved the bail application before this Court, he could not move the Sessions Court, Kottayam. Hence, the bail application may be allowed.

The  learned  Public  Prosecutor,  strenuously opposed the application. She contended that the petitioner was the person who pushed down CW1. The investigation is still in progress. There is a likelihood of the petitioner intimidating the witnesses and tampering with the evidence. Hence, the bail application may be dismissed.

On a perusal of the materials placed on record, prima facie, I do not find a specific allegation made against the petitioner, as now contended by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is undisputed that accused 3 to 6 have been enlarged on bail by the Court of Session, Kottayam in the cases mentioned above.

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials on record and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 20.11.2023, that the investigation is at its final stage and that the accused 3 to 6 have been enlarged on bail, I am of the view that the petitioner is to be released on bail, but subject to stringent conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every alternate Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;

(iv) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law;

(v) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall also be filed and entertained by the court below;

(vi) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State of Delhi and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].