High CourtsSingle Bench

Saifali vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 6 December 2022 · Citation: (2022) 12 KL CK 0061

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120(b), 342, 363, 364A, 451
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 9239 Of 2022
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 · 420 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 2nd accused in Crime No.986/2022 of Kottiyam Police Station, Kollam, alleging offences punishable under Sections 342, 451, 120(b), 364A and 363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

According to the prosecution, the accused had pursuant to a criminal conspiracy to kidnap the children of the defacto complainant trespassed into her house and kidnapped her son aged 14 years and drove away with him in a car and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri.Biju C Abraham, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was also submitted that the petitioner being the 2nd accused in the crime, no specific overt acts are alleged against him and therefore considering the date of arrest which is 07.09.2022, further detention ought not be permitted.

5.

Smt.M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations are serious and that if the petitioner is released on bail, it would prejudice the investigation as well as the prosecution case.

6.

I have considered the rival contentions. The petitioner was arrested on 07.09.2022 and has been in custody since then. Final report has not been filed and today is the 90th day from the date of remand. Even though the allegations are serious in nature, considering the period of detention already undergone, I am of the view that further detention would not serve any purpose.

7.

Accordingly, I allow this application on the following 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 court having jurisdiction.

(b) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.

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

(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.