Munna vs State Of Kerala And Anr

The applicant is the first accused in Crime No.2352/2020 of Kadakkal Police Station, Kollam, for having allegedly committed offences punishable

under Sections 294(b), 341, 326 and 307 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 03.10.2020 at about 9 p.m, the applicant in furtherance of common intention with the 2nd accused,

wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant while he was travelling on a motorcycle along the public road at Kottappuram in Kadakkal Village, and

hurled with abuses. He was thereafter brutally attacked by the applicant and the co-accused with dangerous weapons like sticks and caused grievous

injuries to his scalp, forehead and neck. The injured also sustained injuries to his internal organs and could have succumbed to the injuries sustained

had no medical attendance been given at an early stage.

The applicant prays that he was arrested on 11.10.2020 and has been in custody for more than a month. Recovery of the weapon is already

completed. Therefore, he may be granted bail.

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

The applicant had applied for bail twice before the Sessions court and both of those applications were dismissed, for the reason that it was too early

for the applicant to be granted bail. The second accused was granted bail by the Sessions court. The main reason for denying bail to the applicant was

that he has criminal antecedents.

The learned Public Prosecutor has pointed out that the applicant has five other crimes registered against him. Proceedings under Section 107 of the

Cr.P.C were also initiated against him.

Under the circumstances, in case he is released on bail, there is every possibility of his getting involved in offences of similar nature.

After having considered the arguments advanced by both sides and having perused the records available, I find that the applicant has been involved

in criminal cases during the year 2017. Subsequently, he has not been involved in any other case except for the present crime. All those cases were

for minor offences, except for one which was for an offence punishable under Section 326 IPC. It is also true that the proceedings under Section 107

Cr.P.C were initiated against the applicant for being a habitual offender. Considering the antecedents of the applicant for the last two years, I find that

he need not be incarcerated any longer for the purpose of investigation in this case.

In the result, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees

One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on the following conditions;

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

whichever is earlier.

He shall not attempt to influence or intimidate the witnesses.

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

In the event of violating the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional court.