Thanseer vs State Of Kerala

Raja Vijayaraghavan V, J

The applicant herein is the 4th accused in S.C. No. 901/2018 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge-I, Thiruvananthapuram. He has been charge-sheeted for having committed offence punishable under Section 302, 307, 120B, 449, 201, 202, and 212 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.

The prosecution allegation is that the petitioner, along with the rest of the accused, hatched a plan to commit the murder of one Rajesh and in pursuance to the same, trespassed into his Studio and inflicted injuries leading to his death.

Sri. Omar Salim, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court seeking Regular Bail, and by Annexures-A4 to A9 orders, the applications were all dismissed with directions to the Court of Sessions to conclude the trial in an expeditious manner. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner was arrested on 10.04.2018, and he has been in custody since then. He points out that the examination of the prosecution, as well as the defense witnesses, have been concluded and that the matter is at the stage of arguments. The learned counsel submits that his father is on his deathbed as he is suffering from Ruptured DACA Aneurysm. The learned counsel submits that, having regard to the long period of incarceration he had undergone and the stage of trial, it is only just and proper that he may be released on bail. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner is prepared to abide by any conditions that may be imposed upon by this Court to ensure that he does not abscond.

In response, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the prime accused are all in custody, and if the petitioner is released at this stage there is every likelihood that he will abscond. Reference is made to the earlier applications filed by the petitioner and the circumstances which persuaded this Court to deny bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that there is no change of circumstances warranting his release. However, insofar as the assertion made with regard to the ailing father of the petitioner is concerned, it is submitted that an enquiry was carried out by the Sub Inspector of Police Karunagappally, which disclosed that the father of the petitioner is lying paralyzed and bedridden and he has also been diagnosed with Tumor in his Testicle and he has been referred to the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam for undergoing Surgery. The learned Government Pleader also points out that at the time of the commission of the murder, the petitioner herein was involved in six other crimes.

I have considered the submissions advanced.

Having considered the nature of allegations against the petitioner and the circumstances which persuaded this court to dismiss his bail applications on earlier occasions, I am of the view that the petitioner has not made out a case for grant of regular bail at this stage. However, from the report submitted before this Court by the Sub Inspector of Police, it appears that the father of the petitioner is sick and ailing. I also find that the petitioner has been undergoing incarceration since 10.04.2018. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that interim bail can be granted to the petitioner for ten days.

In the result, this application will stand partly allowed. The Trial Court shall release the applicant provisionally on interim bail for a period of 10 days on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court. It is made clear that the trial court would be at liberty to impose appropriate conditions to ensure his presence before the court as ordered above on 28.01.2023.