Rajeev vs State Of Kerala

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J

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

Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.1474/2021 of Neyyar Dam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging offences punishable under Sections 141, 143, 144, 147, 148, 120B, 294(b), 324, 353 and 307 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, apart from Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

According to the prosecution, the accused, 15 of them, had unlawfully assembled with petrol bomb and other dangerous weapons on 16.07.2021, and after attacking them threw the petrol bomb at the Police and cause damages to the Police jeep causing a loss of Rs.50,000/- and thereby deterred the duty of the Police officials and committed the offences alleged.

Petitioner was initially granted bail in this crime on 01.10.2021. However, in violation of the conditions of bail, he committed yet another crime by involving in Crime No.347/2022 of Neyyar Dam Police Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 506 and 307 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. In the subsequent crime, petitioner was arrested on 24.04.2023 and is stated to have been released on bail in the said case. In the meantime, due to his involvement in the subsequent crime, the earlier bail granted to the petitioner in Crime No.1474/2021 was cancelled and petitioner he was taken into custody.

Sri. Sasith M.R, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, though petitioner has been roped in as an accused in the subsequent crime, it is based on a false allegation solely for the purpose of depriving his liberty as the Police have an axe to grind against him. It was also submitted that, as regards the second crime, there was no serious injury and the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. has been falsely alleged against him. It was further submitted that, notwithstanding the above, the period of detention already undergone from 11.04.2023, ought to be taken into reckoning to order release of the petitioner on bail.

Smt. Neema.T.V, the learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the application and submitted that, petitioner’s involvement in a very serious crime at the first instance and his involvement in similar crime on the subsequent occasion are certainly indicative of the character and conduct of the petitioner and therefore, he ought not to be released on bail. It was further submitted that, even in respect of the subsequent offence, the injuries noted are serious and the involvement of the petitioner is glaringly evident.

I have considered the rival contentions.

The petitioner was arrested on 24.04.2023, after cancelling his bail on 11.04.2023. He was released on bail in the subsequent offence. In the subsequent crime, the injuries noticed are on the back and on the buttocks. Already 50 days have lapsed since the petitioner was arrested.

Taking note of the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that, further detention would amount to punishment before conviction. Though the bail condition has been violated, since for more than 50 days, petitioner has been in detention, a lenient view ought to be adopted. In the first crime, final report was filed and the case is awaiting trial. There is no possibility of an immediate trial also. Hence, Petitioner ought to be released on bail.

Therefore, I allow this application on the following strict conditions:-

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

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 no bail.

e) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

f) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of Neyyar Dam Police Station, except for abiding by the conditions of bail and for participating in 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.