High CourtsSingle Bench

Sajid vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 19 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 KL CK 0154

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammed Nias C.P., J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 143, 144, 147, 149, 402 · Explosive Substances Act, 1908 — Section 27(1)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.7782 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

13 paragraphs · 479 words

Mohammed Nias C.P. J

1.

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

2.

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.846/2023 of Kalpetta Police Station, Wayanad, for having committed offences punishable under Sections 402, 143, 144, 147 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27(1) of the Explosive Substances Act.

3.

The prosecution case is that on 21.07.2023 at about 11.30 hours, the Inspector of Kalpetta Police Station got information that five persons who reached Royal Green Home stay at Puzhamudi in a car, had reached there with an intention to commit some offence and accordingly when the Sub Inspector and party reached the place, four persons ran away from the spot, and after detaining the 1st accused, the police party searched the car and recovered explosive substances and two different number plates for the vehicle, and it is also alleged that the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly there, armed with dangerous weapons for committing robbery and the accused is thereby alleged to have committed the above said offences.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would say that the petitioner is totally innocent and falsely implicated with ulterior motives. There are no other antecedents against the petitioner. At any rate, he points out that the petitioner is in custody from 21.07.2023, and continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary. It is also submitted that the petitioner was arrested from the spot, and all other accused persons ran away from the spot.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition but submitted that recovery had already been effected.

6.

After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and taking note of the nature of the allegations against the petitioner and the vehicle already seized, the fact that he has been in custody since 21.07.2023 and there are no antecedents against the petitioner, and since there is no apprehension raised by the prosecution that if released on bail the petitioner is likely to abscond, I hold that bail can be granted to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application is allowed, and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

(ii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed

(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses;

(iv) The petitioner shall not be involved in any other crime while on bail.

(v) If any of the conditions are violated, the court concerned will be empowered to take steps for cancellation of bail as per law;