Maheen vs State Of Kerala

Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 1st accused in Crime No.50/2021 of Poovar Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed an offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 326 and 308 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and

under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.01.2021 at about 9 p.m., the applicant in furtherance of common intention hurled abuses at the de facto

complainant and thereafter assaulted him by means of dangerous weapons like sword and iron rod and caused grievous injuries to him as his right ear

was completely cut off by means of sword used by the 2nd accused. The applicant allegedly used a iron rod to cause hurt. There is no allegation

against the applicant for having caused any grievous injury. He was arrested on 14.01.2021 and has been in custody since then. He has been

subjected to custodial interrogation and therefore he seeks bail.

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

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the applicant is a notorious criminal. He is a history-sheeter and has been included in the rowdy list of

the police station. He has been committing crimes since 2006 and the last crime he was involved in the year 2019, altogether he is an accused in seven

other crimes. Most of the crimes alleged against him are for bailable offences except for one crime is under under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations as against him are not true. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that

the applicant was involved in cases upto 2009. The crime of 2019 pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor actually does not pertains to him and

that is some other person holding the same name who was involved in that crime. However, the applicant is not involved in any grave crimes till date.

This is the only crime where he is alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 308 of IPC. In this crime also he has not caused any

grievous injury to the de facto complainant. It is the 2nd accused, who had used the sword to chop off the de facto complainant's ear. Since the

applicant has been in custody for more than a month, recovery has already been effected, I find no reason for further detention of the applicant.

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on execution of 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 conditions:-

(i) He shall appear before the investigating officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of two months or till the filing of final

report whichever is earlier.

(ii) He shall not get involved in similar cases during the currency of the bail.

(iii) He shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses.

In case of violation of the bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.