High CourtsSingle Bench

Sajin @ Kukku vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 25 April 2023 · Citation: (2023) 04 KL CK 0174

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.G. Ajithkumar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294(b), 307, 324, 506(iii)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 2622 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 · 447 words

P.G. Ajithkumar, J

1.

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

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.390 of 2023 of Nagaroor Police Station. He allegedly had committed the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 506(iii) & 307 IPC.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4.

The prosecution allegation is that, on 13.03.2023 at about 12.15 am, accused with an intention to commit homicide of the defacto complainant, attacked him with a concrete piece by uttering obscene words. Accused inflicted incised wound on the crown of his head by hitting with the concrete piece. When he fell down, accused dragged him through the road by holding his left leg. Thus, accused is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

5.

The petitioner would contend that he did not involve in the alleged crime and without any material or evidence, he has been implicated in the crime. He is innocent. The investigation in the matter has been progressed considerably and there is no reason or justification for his further detention.

6.

The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that considering the seriousness of the offence and the possibility of interfering with the investigation by the petitioner in the event of his release on bail, this petition deserve only to be dismissed.

7.

The allegation levelled against the petitioner would reveal that the weapon grabbed by the petitioner from the place of occurrence was used to inflict the injuries. The petitioner was arrested on 15.03.2023 and has been in custody ever since.

8.

The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner did not involve in any other crime and investigation in the matter has been progressed considerably. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioner can be released on bail subject to the strict conditions.

In the result, the bail application is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, subject to the following conditions:

(i) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for; and

(iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any offence.

(iv) The petitioner shall not enter the local area of the Thiruvananthapuram District until the final report in the matter is filed.

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.