High CourtsSingle Bench

Prasoon vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 6 June 2023 · Citation: (2023) 06 KL CK 0028

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 149, 307, 324, 326, 341, 450
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4213 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 · 419 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.294 of 2023 of Perambra Police Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 450, 324, 326 and 307 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

According to the prosecution, the accused had, on 22-04-2023, trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and restrained him with intent to kill and caused serious injury by hacking with a machete while the other accused participated in the crime and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri. Krishna Mani B., the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that accused Nos. 1 to 4 were arrested on 27-04-2023 while accused Nos. 5 and 6 were arrested on 28-04-2023, and that they have been continuing in custody since then. It was further submitted that the petitioners are innocent and that there is absolutely no material to connect them with the crime.

5.

Smt. Neema T.V., the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and submitted that the 7th accused is yet to be arrested and therefore, if the petitioners are released on bail there is every chance of the investigation being prejudiced.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions.

7.

Though the allegations raised against the petitioners are serious in nature. Considering the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that further detention would not serve any purpose, especially, since their custodial interrogation is already completed. Non-arrest of one of the accused by itself is not a ground to deny the liberty of the petitioners.

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

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

(b) Petitioners shall co-operate with the trial of the case.

(c) Petitioners shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall they attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(d) Petitioners shall not commit any other offences while they are on bail.

(e) Petitioners shall not leave the State of Kerala 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.