High CourtsSingle Bench

Mithunraj @ Kunjukuttan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 30 May 2023 · Citation: (2023) 05 KL CK 0246

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 328, 452, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3944 Of 2023
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

14 paragraphs · 465 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

2.

Petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No.699 of 2023 of Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 452, 506, 323, 324, 326, 328 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860.

3.

According to the prosecution, on 2-05-2023, due to a previous enmity with the defacto complainant the accused trespassed into the shoproom of the complainant armed with dangerous weapons, and the 1st accused inflicted injury with a sword which was resisted by the complainant and thereafter stabbed Sri.Abhilash- an employee of the shop while the 2nd and 3rd accused assaulted the said employee thereby causing severe injuries to him and the accused thus committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri. Rasheed C.Nooranad, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is only 20 years in age and that he has been falsely roped in as an accused. According to him, even going by the prosecution case no overt act has been alleged against the petitioner and since he was taken into custody on 8-05-2023, further detention ought not to be permitted.

5.

Sri.P.G.Manu, the learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, opposed the application and submitted that serious allegations are levelled against the petitioner and that the investigation will be seriously prejudiced, if he is released on bail.

6.

On a consideration of the circumstances arising in the case, I notice that no specific overt acts have been alleged against the petitioner. Taking into reckoning the young age of the petitioner and also the absence of any overt acts alleged against him, this court is of the opinion that further detention of the petitioner ought not to be continued, especially since he has been in custody from 8-05-2023.

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

(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

(c) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence or contact the defacto complainant or his family members.

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India until conclusion of trial.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.