High CourtsSingle Bench

Raishad Alam Khan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 31 May 2023 · Citation: (2023) 05 KL CK 0265

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. Badharudeen, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 147, 149, 186, 307, 323, 326, 332, 341, 353
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 4007 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

14 paragraphs · 513 words

A. Badharudeen, J

1.

B.A.No.4007/2023 is an application for regular bail, moved by accused Nos.1,3, 4 and 5 in Crime No.9/2023 of Kavarathi Police Station, Lakshadweep. Accused No.2 in the above crime, has filed B.A.No.4040/2023, seeking regular bail.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

3.

I have perused the relevant documents.

4.

The prosecution case is that, at about 9.45 p.m. on 28.3.2023, petitioners/accused herein formed into unlawful assembly, with knowledge that they are all members of the said assembly, armed with deadly weapons, to cause death of the de facto complainant. Subsequently, in prosecution of their common object, they assaulted the de facto complainant with such intention. Eventhough the de facto complainant sustained very serious injuries, he survived. On the above facts, prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 326, 307 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners canvassed regular bail to the petitioners on the submission that the petitioners have been in custody from 29.3.2023 and the investigation has practically completed.

6.

Whereas, it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for Lakshadweep Administration that the 2nd accused is a person, having criminal antecedents and he has involvement in one more crime, vide Crime No.24/2022, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 341, 186, 323, 353 and 332 of the Indian Penal Code. But, no criminal antecedents reported insofar as the other petitioners are concerned.

7.

On perusal of the prosecution records, along with copy of discharge summary issued from Lakshmi Hospital, the prosecution allegations coupled with ‘Fracture Mandible – Left Ramus and Right Anterior Body, could be gathered, to justify the prosecution allegations, prima facie. Eventhough the 2nd accused is having criminal antecedents by involving in one crime, the other accused have no criminal antecedents. Since the Investigation has achieved  much  progress,  there  is  no  reason  to  detain  the petitioners in custody further. Therefore, they can be enlarged on bail, on conditions.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the petitioners are released on bail, by imposing the following conditions:

i. The petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) each by themselves and with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court concerned.

ii. The petitioners shall not intimidate the witnesses or tamper with evidence. They shall co-operate with the investigation and shall be available for trial.

iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.

iv. The petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

v. The petitioners shall not involve or indulge in any other offence during the currency of bail and any such event, if reported or came to the notice of this Court, the same shall be a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.