High CourtsSingle Bench

Mujeeb Rahman P.K vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 11 April 2023 · Citation: (2023) 04 KL CK 0095

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 308, 323, 324, 363
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 2387 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

15 paragraphs · 548 words

Dr. Kauser Edappagath, J

1.

This application is filed u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail.

2.

The applicants are the accused Nos.2, 4 and 5 in Crime No.168/2023 of Shornur Police Station. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 363, 323, 324, 294(b), 308 r/w 149 of IPC.

3.

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 02.03.2023 at 08.00 p.m., the applicants along with the remaining accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, kidnapped the de facto complainant from FKFC Club, inflicted bodily injury with a knife with an intention to kill him and thereby committed the above said offences.

4.

I have heard Sri.Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel for the applicants and Smt.T.V.Neema, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.

5.

The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.

6.

I went through the FIS and connected records. The only non bailable offence alleged is under Section 308 IPC. So as to attract Section 308 of IPC, the allegation is that the accused No.2 drew a line to the de facto complainant's neck with a knife. Except abrasion, no serious injury has been sustained by the de facto complainant. The applicants have no criminal antecedents. Considering the allegations levelled against the applicants, their custodial interrogation does not appear to be necessary. For these reasons, it is a fit case where pre-arrest bail can be granted to the applicants.

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

(i) The applicants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.

(ii) The applicants shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.

(iii) The applicants shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.

(iv) The applicants shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.

(v) The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The applicants shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

(vii) The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.