High CourtsSingle Bench

Sreevalsan vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 2 December 2022 · Citation: (2022) 12 KL CK 0031

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 212, 302, 308 · Explosive Substances Act, 1908 — Section 3(a) · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 8005 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

18 paragraphs · 672 words

Bechu Kurian Thomas, J.

1.

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

2.

Petitioner is the 5th accused in Crime No.132 of 2021 of Kattoor Police Station, Thrissur District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 302, 308, 120B, 212 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 apart from Section 3(a) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

3.

According to the prosecution, on 14-03-2021 while the deceased was standing along with her relative on the roadside near her residential building, accused Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 6 after conspiring with the remaining accused, hurled explosives towards her and caused her death after stabbing and hacking her with deadly weapons and inflicted grievous injuries including blast injuries and thereafter she succumbed to the injuries and the accused committed the offences alleged.

4.

Sri. Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution case is false and that incident as alleged had not occurred. It was also submitted that petitioner was arrested on 17-03-2021 and he has been in custody since then. According to the learned counsel, no overt acts have been alleged against the petitioner and he has been roped in as an accused only as a conspirator without any basis. It was also submitted that, petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed and considering the long period of detention already undergone, further detention ought not to be permitted.

5.

Smt. M.K.Pushpalatha, the learned Public Persecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations are serious and that petitioner is one of the conspirators of the murder. It was further pointed out that the petitioner is involved in 27 other crimes and that considering his criminal antecedents he ought not to be released on bail, at this juncture, lest, he intimidates the witnesses.

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner in reply, submitted that out of 29 cases, only 7 cases are pending and that petitioner has not been convicted in a single case and hence, those cases cannot be treated as criminal antecedents against him. He also referred to the decision in Prabhakar Tewari vs The State of Uttar Pradesh (2020) 11 SCC 648 and submitted that the pendency of several criminal cases by itself cannot be the basis for refusal of the prayer for bail.

7.

I have considered the rival contentions.

8.

Petitioner was arrested on 17-03-2021 He has been in custody for the last more than one year and eight months. Petitioner was roped in as an accused as a conspirator. The trial has not yet started. As many as 80 witnesses are required to be examined by the prosecution, and summons to the witnesses have been issued on 24-11-2022.

9.

Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, including the period of detention already undergone and the nature of the allegations against the petitioner, I am of the view that further detention may amount to imposing punishment before his conviction.

In the result, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-

(a) Petitioner shall 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.

(b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.

(c) Petitioner shall not enter into the jurisdictional limits of Kattoor Police Station.

(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.

(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

(f) Petitioner shall not leave the country without the permission of the jurisdictional Court.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.