Nikhil Antony And Ors vs State Of Kerala

This is an application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

The applicants are accused 1 to 6 in Crime No.828/2020 of Thoppumpady Police Station for having allegedly committed the offences punishable

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 and 506 (ii) read with Section 149 of the I.P.C.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 07.07.2020 while the 2nd accused was coming towards his residence, there was a confrontation between

the de facto complainant, his brother and his friend with the 2nd accused regarding a road rage incident, in consequence of which a scuffle ensued

between them and the applicants. The de facto complainant allegedly sustained a fracture on his left hand; while his brother sustained a fracture of his

left leg. The friend of the de facto complainant sustained a lacerated injury on his scalp. They were allegedly hit with a dangerous weapon like an iron

road.

The applicants state that they do not have any criminal antecedents and that the injuries sustained was as a result of the scuffle that ensued

between them and it was not as the result of the hit with an iron rod. They were earlier approached this Court for anticipatory bail by filing

B.A.No.4837/2020 and this Court disposed of that application with a direction to the applicants to surrender before the investigating officer.

Consequently, the 4th applicant surrendered on 25.11.2020 and was released on interim bail, and thereafter, police custody was sought for two days on

27.11.2020 and was produced before the jurisdictional court and remanded to judicial custody on the same day. Applicants 1 to 3, 5 and 6 surrendered

before the investigating officer on 04.12.2020 as per the direction of this Court granting an extension of time to surrender and they were granted

interim bail.

Thereafter, on 14.12.2020 they were produced before the jurisdictional court and remanded to judicial custody. The applicants applied for bail before

the jurisdictional court and the same was dismissed.

The applicants submit that they do not have any criminal antecedents and that custodial interrogation is over and recovery is already complete, and

therefore, there is no point in incarcerating them for a longer period than this. Under the circumstances, the applicants seek regular bail.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Magistrate has in the order detailed the injuries sustained to the three injured in this crime. It is seen that only one of the injured, de

facto complainant’s brother, namely, Hussainar has sustained the bonny injury of right elbow, which is also a suspected injury. There is no

confirmation regarding the fracture sustained by him. No grievous injury has been caused either to the de facto complainant or his friend. Admittedly,

the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. I cannot understand why the learned Magistrate has declined to grant bail to the applicants mainly

for the reason that one of them has sustained grievous injury. Considering the present pandemic situation, the applicants need not be incarcerated any

longer. Hence, I find no reason to disallow the application for bail.

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on the execution of bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees

fifty thousand only) each, with two solvent sureties each, for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court, on the following other

conditions:

i) They shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for and shall cooperate with the investigation;

ii) They shall not attempt to influence or intimidate the witnesses; and

iii) They shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail.

In case of breach of any of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional Court.