Partly allowed

Vikas v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Aug 2020Bail Appl./4134/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench bail application filed for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under IPC. Court rejected bail for accused using weapons but granted relief to one accused on bond conditions, directing surrender for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to Fifth Accused on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties; other petitions dismissed. All accused directed to surrender within two weeks.

Vikas Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 27TH SRAVANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.4134 OF 2020

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 413/2020 DATED 27-03-2020 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM

¶7

CRIME NO.183/2020 OF Paravoor Police Station , Kollam

¶8

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

¶9

1 VIKAS, AGED 26 YEARS S/O.MADHUSOODHANANPILLAI, USHAS, KALAKKODU CHERRI, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 302. 601302 2 GOKUL, AGED 23 YEARS S/O.GOPI, GOPI NIVAS, KALAKKODU CHERRI, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 302.

¶10

3 ARUN, AGED 21 YEARS S/O.MOHANAN PILLAI, KALAVEETTIL PADINJATTATHIL, KALAKKODU CHERRI, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 302.

¶11

4 BIBINRAJ, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.DEVARAJAN, ASHARIVILAKOM, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691302. 5 UNNIKUTTAN, AGED 25 YEARS S/O.APPU, KIZHAKKUMKARAVILA, POOTHAKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691 302. BY ADVS. SRI.K.SIJU SMT.S.SEETHA

¶12

BA 4134/2020

¶13

-2-

¶14

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶15

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031. 682031

¶16

R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP

¶19

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

BA 4134/2020

-3-

O R D E R

Dated this the 18th day of August 2020

¶24

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 Cr.PC.

¶25

Applicants are accused 1 to 5 in Crime No.183/2020 of Paravoor Police Station, Kollam for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 341, 294(b), 323 and 324 read with Section 149 IPC. Subsequent to that, Section 326 IPC also was incorporated.

¶26

The prosecution case in brief is that on 8.3.2020 at about 22.30 hours near Kanyamadhom temple, the applicants were members of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of the said unlawful assembly, they assaulted the defacto complainant and his friends, namely Aneesh and Manu and inflicted grievous hurt to the defacto complainant and hurt to others by beating them with square steel tubes. An incised wound was also caused on the face of

¶27

BA 4134/2020

¶28

-4-

¶29

the defacto complainant. His shoulder bones were dislocated because of the attack. It is submitted for the applicants that the crime is registered because of political reasons and that there was a conflict regarding the temple due to which the applicants have been falsely implicated. The applicants do not have any criminal antecedents and therefore, they may be released on pre-arrest bail.

¶30

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that all the accused, except the fifth accused, were armed with dangerous weapons like square steel tubes, which had sharp edges, as a result of which severe injuries were caused to the defacto complainant, and his friends were also injured. The weapons are yet to be recovered. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

¶31

After having considered the entire facts and circumstances of this case, I find that the applicants do not

¶32

BA 4134/2020

¶33

-5-

¶34

have any criminal antecedents. But they have to be subjected to interrogation for the recovery of the weapons. Fifth accused did not use any weapon and had only slapped the defacto complainant and his friends. Therefore, fifth accused can be granted pre-arrest bail. The application for anticipatory bail filed by the remaining accused is to be dismissed.

¶35

In the result, the Bail Application is allowed in part and the applicants are all directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. After interrogation and recovery, all the accused except fifth accused, shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The fifth accused shall 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 investigating officer, on the following conditions:

¶36

(i) He shall appear before the investigating officer

¶37

as and when called for and cooperate with the investigation.

¶38

BA 4134/2020

¶39

-6-

¶40

(ii) He shall not intimidate or influence the

¶41

witnesses.

¶42

(iii) He shall not get involved in any similar offence

¶43

during the currency of the bail.

¶44

In case of breach of any of the above bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON

JUDGE

Vikas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hilda Sandra Duram, Vs State of Kerala

Nidhnin Vs State of Kerala

Ansab Vs Public Prosecutor

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala

Chenath Musthafa Vs State of Kerala

Firoz Kunnumparambil Vs Public Prosecutor