Yasir @Kunhani vs State Of Kerala And Ors

Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 4th accused in Crime No.27/2021 of Melattur Police Station, Malappuram for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 324, 307 and 302 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Subsequently, offences under Sections 120B, 341 and 326 were added.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 26.01.2021 the applicant and the other accused hatched a conspiracy to commit murder of the deceased and as a result of the conspiracy and in furtherance of common intention on 27.01.2021 at about 21.10 hours at Oravampuram Angadi in Nenmini amsom, the applicant along with the other accused wrongfully restrained the deceased and his friends and attacked them by means of dangerous weapon like knife, wooden log and bottles and as a result of which, the deceased sustained fatal injures due to being stabbed by the 1st accused and the 2nd accused also inflicted injuries on him with wooden log and also sustained grievous hurt on head as a result of being beaten up by A3 with a dangerous weapon like bottle. The 2nd accused also stabbed other persons who were present there. The allegation against the applicant is that apart of conspiracy and he was present and it has been confirmed by the CCTV footages and also by the FI Statement given by the de facto complainant. It is stated that he was actively assisting the remaining accused who were involved in the assault. But it is also admitted that the applicant was not wielding any weapon. He was only part of the conspiracy. Conspiracy theory had come up later during investigation. Because the deceased had some enmity with the brother of the 1st accused and had assaulted him. As a result of which, there was some mediation going on and they attempted to settle, but that did not fructify. Consequent to the local body election, the dispute between them was further flared up and as a result of victory procession being made in front of the house of the 1st accused, one of the persons pelted a cracker at the house of the A1, which instigated him and immediately there was a scuffle, which resulted in death of one of them.

The applicant state that he is innocent and the allegations are not true. It is actually a result of family rivalry between accused Nos.1 to 3 on one side and the family of the deceased on the other side. They were at loggerheads for the last so many years. The applicant does not belong to that family. The mere fact that he was present at the scene of occurrence does not indicate towards, his being the part of the conspiracy. In view of the fact that he has no criminal antecedents and has no active overt act in the alleged assault as he has been in custody since 28.01.2021.

After having heard the submissions made on both sides, I find that the applicant is a person having no criminal antecedents. The deceased and accused Nos.1 to 3 had an existing rivalry and there are family disputes between them. That apart there was also political animosity between them. The presence of the applicant is admitted. The FI statement also indicates that his present at the scene of occurrence. But the FI statement specifically states that he did not do anything apart from being present there in furtherance of common intention with others. The conspiracy has been revealed during the subsequent investigation and it will have to be proved by the prosecution that where exactly the conspiracy had taken place so as to implicate the applicant. For the meanwhile, I find that there is no purpose will be served by the further detention of the applicant. Hence, the Bail Application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on following conditions:-

(i) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

(ii) He shall not get involved in similar cases during the currency of the bail.

(iii) He shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses .

In case of violation of the bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to move for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.