High CourtsSingle Bench

Savio vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 29 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KL CK 0253

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P., J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 201, 326, 307, 468, 471, 506
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.2232 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

12 paragraphs · 698 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.132 of 2022 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, alleging commission of offences under Sections 120B, 201, 326, 307, 468, 471 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that owing to previous animosity with the de-facto complainant, the petitioner had attacked the de-facto complainant with a baseball stick and when the de-facto complainant attempted to escape, the petitioner followed him and inflicted severe injuries on various parts of his body using a chopper and also threatened to kill the de-facto complainant.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the case is not as projected by the prosecution. It is submitted that the 2nd accused in the case, who is none other than the mother of the petitioner, is an active social worker and she had occasion to file complaints against the de-facto complainant, who is a notorious criminal who is accused in several cases including a case alleging the commission of rape on an 87 year old lady. It is submitted that following the complaint of the 2nd accused / mother of the petitioner that the de-facto complainant had attacked and assaulted her and the matter is pending trial as C.C.No.620 of 2021 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – I, Ernakulam. It is submitted that when the mother of the petitioner had gone to the District Court complex in connection with the giving of evidence in that case, the de-facto complainant had again attacked her, as a result of which, yet another complaint was filed against the de-facto complainant. It is submitted that the present case is nothing but a counter blast and the allegations made are totally untrue.

4.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of bail. The circumstances of the case appearing from the record are pointed out. The severity of the injuries suffered by the de-facto complainant are also pointed out to show that the attack was most brutal. It is submitted that the offence was committed after thorough preparation as the number plate of the motorcycle in which the petitioner travelled was changed and the colour of the vehicle was also changed. The mobile phone of the petitioner was switched off and kept at a different place so as to mislead the police while conducting investigation in to the matter. It is submitted that the police have obtained evidence from the shop from which the petitioner had purchased the baseball bat, which was used to attack the de-facto complainant. It is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.

5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the petitioner is a 22 year old MCA student, I am of the view that he can be directed to be released on bail especially considering the fact that no criminal antecedents are reported against him and also on account of the fact that his continued detention may not be necessary for the purpose of any investigation. The petitioner has been in custody for 53 days as on date.

6.

In the result, this bail application is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

(1) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

(2) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer in Crime No.132 of 2022 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, on every Saturday at 11.00AM until further orders;

(3) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.132 of 2022 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam;

(4) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.132 of 2022 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court for cancellation of bail.