High CourtsSingle Bench

Vivek vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 15 March 2022 · Citation: (2022) 03 KL CK 0101

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopinath P, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 212, 294(b), 302, 323, 324, 341, 379, 393, 411, 413, 427, 506 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 — Section 27(b)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 1778 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 · 485 words

Gopinath P., J

1.

This is an application for regular bail.

2.

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 1275 of 2021 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 379, 411 & 413 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner knowingly purchased a stolen motorcycle from the 1st accused.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the petitioner had purchased the motorcycle from the 1st accused bona fide believing that the motorcycle belonged to the 1st accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner had no knowledge, whatsoever, that the motorcycle was stolen and that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser for value.

5.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes grant of bail. It is submitted that the following criminal antecedents are reported against the petitioner;

1.

Crime No.365/2017 u/s 323, 324, 341 & 294(b) r/w 34 IPC;

2.

Crime No.267/2021 u/s 323 & 324 r/w 34 IPC;

3.

Crime No.859/2021 u/s 302, 120(B) & 212 r/w 34 IPC; and

4.

Crime No.1111/2021 u/s 393, 427, 506 & 341 IPC & 27(b) of NDPS Act.

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in Crime No.859 of 2021, the specific allegation against the petitioner is that under Section 212 of IPC (harbouring an offender), which is a bailable offence. It is submitted that none of the other cases reported against the petitioner warrant the rejection of the bail application. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for 56 days and that his continued detention is not necessary for the purpose of any investigation into the matter.

7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account of the nature of allegations against the petitioner, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted bail, subject to conditions.

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

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

(b)Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No. 1275 of 2021 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District, whenever called upon to do so;

(c) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence any witness in Crime No. 1275 of 2021 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District;

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

If any of the aforesaid conditions is violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 1275 of 2021 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District, may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail.