High Court of Kerala allowed bail applications filed by six accused persons arrested in Crime No.429/2019. The Court held that default bail is entitled under Section 167(2)(a)(i) CrPC as investigation exceeded 90 days.
Petitioners granted bail on executing bond of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.6946 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1459/2019 DATED 07-09-2019 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, THALASSERY
CRIME NO.429/2019 OF IRITTY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.6:
NIDHIN, AGED 29 YEARS S/O. MOHANAN, PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, DEVIKRIPA, THILLANKERY AMSOM, PALLYAM DESOM, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR, PIN - 670703.
BY ADV. SMT.M.M.DEEPA
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.MAYA M.N.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6969/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BA:6946 & 6969 OF 2019
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.6969 OF 2019
CRIME NO.429/2019 OF IRITTY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 5:
BY ADV. SMT.M.M.DEEPA
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAMESH CHAND
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.10.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..6946/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BA:6946 & 6969 OF 2019
3
ORDER
These applications are filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
of 2019 registered at the Iritty Police Station under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 326, 308, 395, 109 120B r/w. Section 149 of the IPC.
that more than 90 days have elapsed from the date of remand of the applicants. The investigation has not been completed till date. Section 167(2)
BA:6946 & 6969 OF 2019
4
(a)(i) of the Cr.P.C. would squarely apply and the applicants are entitled to default bail.
In the result, these applications will stand allowed. The applicants shall be released on bail on each of them 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. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:
a) The applicants shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturdays between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m., for a period of 2 months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
b) They shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
c) They shall surrender their passports before the court below or if they do not have the one, they shall file an affidavit to that effect within five days of their release. Application for release of the passport, if any, shall be considered by the Trial court at the appropriate stage.
d) They shall not commit any offence while on bail.
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.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE
krj
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to default bail as more than 90 days have elapsed since arrest without final report.
Whether the High Court should grant statutory bail when investigation is not completed within the statutory period.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of AssamReferred¶40
Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam
1 [2017 (15) SCC 67]Referred¶44
2 provisions across 1 enactments
NIDHIN
PRAVEEN C.
JANEESH P.P.
LIJITH P.P.
SHIBINRAJ K.
LIJIL M.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
Parties & counsel
