High CourtsSingle Bench

Rouf vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 27 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 KL CK 0174

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Haripal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 395
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Appl. Nos. 6014, 6017, 6018 Of 2021
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

32 paragraphs · 538 words

K.Haripal, J

1.

These are applications for bail moved under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C by accused in Crime 146/2021 of Kodakara Police Station. Petitioners in

B.A.No.6417/2021 are accused Nos.6 and 19, whereas 17th accused is the petitioner in B.A.No.6018/2021 and accused Nos.1 and 14 are the

applicants in B.A.No.6214/2021. These are second applications for bail moved by them after their earlier applications having been found against by

this Court.

2.

I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution for the State.

3.

That was a highway robbery allegedly taken place on 03.04.2021 at 04:40 a.m, near Kodakara over-bridge on the National Highway, NH 544. The

crime was registered on 07.04.2021 alleging offence punishable under Section 395 of the IPC, alleging that some identifiable persons had robbed the

informant Rs.25,00,000/-, while he was travelling from Kozhikkode to Ernaklulam in Ertiga car bearing Reg.No. KL-56G 6786. During course of

Investigation, it came out that actual amount involved was Rs.3.5 crores. Whatever it may be, Â

all the 22 persons including accused Nos.1 to 7 who had actually committed robbery and those who had hatched conspiracy and shared the booty have

been brought to book. A final report has been laid against 22 persons. All the 22 persons have been arrested also.

4.

By detailed order dated 13.08.2021, in B.A.No.5149/2021 and connected cases, bail was granted to ten accused persons in six bail applications, out

of the 22 accused. The main consideration for granting bail was the laying of final report by the police. The court also found that even though it is

stated that it was only preliminary final report, overwhelming grounds were not urged for the continued detention of the accused persons. The very

same reasonings are applicable here also.

5.

Even though the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution has opposed the applications for bail, borrowing the very same reasonings in

granting bail to other ten accused, these petitioners also can be released on bail.

Therefore, on the very same considerations, the petitioners shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

Â

i) The petitioners shall execute bond for Rs.1,00,000/-

(Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

ii) They shall surrender their passports within ten days from the date of release on bail before the jurisdictional court. If they do not possess passports,

affidavits shall be filed to that effect;

iii) They shall not try to contact or influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

iv) They shall not enter Thrissur revenue district except for the purpose of attending courts, until further orders;

v) They shall not involve in any crime during the period on bail;

vi) They shall appear before the jurisdictional court/committal court as and when required;

vii) Petitioners shall strictly follow the various guidelines issued by the State and Central Governments with respect to keeping of social distancing in

the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

viii) If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.

The bail applications are allowed as above..