Sanu K.T vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the first accused in crime No.745/2023 of the Peechi Police Station, Thrissur, registered against the accused (four in number), for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.341, 447, 294(b), 427, 506(II) , read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.3(a) of the Explosive Substances Act. The petitioner was arrested on 17.12.2023.

The essence of the prosecution case is that: On 25.10.2023 around 10.30 p.m, the accused 1 and 2, out of their previous animosity and in furtherance of their common intention, had wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant in front of his house and the second accused with a sword in his hand had uttered obscene words, threatened the defacto complainant and destroyed his chair causing a loss of Rs.400/-to the defacto complainant. The accused had also caused an explosion. Thus, they have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri.Abraham Mathan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. Even going by the prosecution case the petitioner cannot be implicated in the crime. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 17.12.2023, which is more than a month. This Court had granted interim bails to the accused 2 to 4 as per Annexure-3 order. The Investigating Officer interrogated the said accused and released them on bail. The investigation in the case is practically complete and further detention of the petitioner is unnecessary. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, he conceded to the fact that the accused 2 to 4 were granted interim bail by this Court, their questioning is complete, the recovery is effected and the investigation is at its fag end. He also submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 17.12.2023.

After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 17.12.2023, this Court had granted interim bail to the accused 2 to 4 and their interrogation is complete and  the recovery is effected and the investigation is practically completed, I deem it appropriate to release  the petitioner on bail, but subject to stringent conditions.

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to 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, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of one month or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail;

(iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;

(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law.

(vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.

(vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].