High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajeesh K.K vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 11 January 2023 · Citation: (2023) 01 KL CK 0095

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294(b), 307, 324, 341, 427, 436, 452
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 51 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 · 421 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.497/2022 of Maloor Police Station, Kannur District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 452, 341, 324, 294(b), 427, 436 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 1860.

3.

According to the prosecution, on 12.10.2022 at 6.00 pm the accused tresspassed into the house of the defacto complainant, who is none other than his wife and hit her head with a stone and thereafter set fire to the household utensils causing loss to an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-to the defacto complainant and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.Sunny Mathew, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and that the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that petitioner was arrested on 13.10.2022 and has been in custody since then.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and even though the final report was filed on 28.11.2022, releasing him on bail would cause prejudice to the prosecution case.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions.

7.

Even though the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, having regard to the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that the continued detention of the petitioner is not required in the circumstances of the case, more so since the investigation is over and the final report has already been filed. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

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

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

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

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

(d) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(e) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.

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.