Sarath vs State Of Kerala

Ziyad Rahman A.A., J

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1901 of 2021 of Kunnamkulam police station. Aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 341, 323, 324, 308, 427, 294(b) and 506 read with Section 34 IPC.

The prosecution case is that, the accused Nos.1 to 3 trespassed into the veranda of the house of the de facto complainant at 1.30 a.m on 02.11.2021 and assaulted him with a knife and attacked the wife of the defacto complainant. A car and scooter parked in the courtyard of the de facto complainant were also damaged. The petitioner was arrested on 03.11.2021 and since then he is under judicial custody.

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

The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. It is pointed out that the de facto complainant is the paternal uncle of the petitioner who is residing nearby. During the midnight, while hearing the hue and cry of the de facto complainant he woke up. Upon reaching the house of de facto complainant he found some persons assaulting the de facto complainant. Immediately on seeing him the assailants ran away from the premises. However, merely because of his presence there he has been made an accused. In such circumstances, he seeks for bail.

On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposes the bail application, by pointing out that, there are specific allegations against the petitioner in the first information statement, as per which, he assaulted the wife of the de facto complainant. Apart from the above, there is allegation that, he caused damages to the car and scooter parked in the premises of the house of the de facto complainant. He is involved in two other cases; one registered in the year 2013 wherein, he is accused of committing offences punishable under Sections 326 and 324. Another case registered against him is for the offence punishable under the Money Lenders Act, in the year 2015. It is pointed out that, if he is released on bail, he is likely to threaten the witnesses and thereby interfere with the investigation.

It is true that there are allegations against the petitioner herein as well. However, the fact remains that the petitioner is in custody since 03.11.2021. The acts which formed the basis of section 324 and 308, were mainly alleged against the 1st accused. He is in custody for the past more than one month. The apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions. Thus in the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that, continued incarceration of the petitioner may not be necessary. In such circumstances, the petitioner can be released on bail, subject to stringent conditions and by ensuring his co-operation with the ongoing investigation in all respects.

Thus, the bail application is allowed with the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate/Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation.

(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m on every Wednesday until the filing of final report.

(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of like nature while on bail.

(v) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.