High CourtsSingle Bench

Muhammed Ismail vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 18 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 KL CK 0199

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 294(b), 307, 323, 324, 326, 341, 452
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 2592 Of 2021
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

10 paragraphs · 478 words
1.

Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.113/2021 of Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 452, 294(b), 324, 341, 326 and 307 of IPC.

2.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 20.01.2021 at about 3.30 p.m, at Navaikulam Village, the applicant allegedly trespassed into a shop owned by the de facto complainant, who is none other than the applicant's own brother in law and due to the previous enmity towards him with respect to a property dispute, with the intention to murder the de facto complainant, the applicant allegedly hurled abuses at him and assaulted him with a dangerous weapon like a knife and causing five injuries, including a fracture of the left hand, and thus attempted to commit murder.

3.

The applicant states that he is innocent and that the allegations are not true. He has no criminal antecedents. The recovery has already been completed. He has been in custody since 23.01.2021. Further detention of the applicant may not be necessary. The applicant was attacked by the de facto complainant on the same day, in consequence of which Crime No.115/2021 of Kallambalam Police Station has been registered against the de facto complainant for offences punishable under Sections 341, 323 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The applicant states that he is willing to abide by any conditions.

4.

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

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The injuries are grave but the recovery is already completed. Therefore, I find no reason to decline bail to the applicant. But the applicant is a neighbour of the de facto complainant, there is every possibility of his causing threat to the de facto complainant, in case he is released on bail. Therefore, stringent conditions will have to be imposed. Hence 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 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 the final report whichever is earlier.

(ii) He shall not enter the police station limits of Kallambalam Police Station for a period of two months, except for complying with condition No.1.

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

(iv) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail.

In case of violation of any bail condition, the prosecution is at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.