Court dismissed anticipatory bail application filed by accused A1 and A2. On recording that prosecution version appeared more probable involving grave injuries and weapon recovery, court directed surrender within two weeks and permitted regular bail application post-arrest.
Direction to applicants to surrender before investigating officer within two weeks
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 ASHOK MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
Crime No: 2228 of 2020 of Varkala Police Station Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONERS/A1 & A2:
1 NAZEER AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEFA, RESIDING AT HAJIRA MANZIL, MUTTAPPALAM, CHEMMARUTHI, VARKALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695143.
2 SAJEEV AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEFA VILAYIL VEEDU, NADAYARA, VARKALA P.O, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695141.
BY ADV. SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHERS PRESENT:
SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
2
O R D E R
Dated this the 9th day of December 2020
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438
Cr.PC.
No.2228 of 2020 of Varkala Police Station,
Tiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 342, 294(b), 323,
324, 326 and 427 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
24.06.2020 at about 7.00 pm, irked on seeing the de
facto complainant engaged in a conversation with the
daughter of the 2nd accused at his house, the
applicants and the other accused persons took the de
facto complainant inside the house, and brutally
assaulted him with dangerous weapons like iron block
and handle of the spade, resulted in his losing two
teeth and also sustained a fracture of L1 Vertebra and
ribs, and his mobile phone worth Rs.25,000/- was also damaged.
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
3
totally untrue. In fact, the de facto complainant had trespassed into the house of A2 and outraged the
modesty of his daughter. When he was caught red-handed, he attempted to flee and in that process fell down from
the first floor of the house and sustained the
injuries. The allegation of assault is not true, and therefore, they seek anticipatory bail.
the de facto complainant was invited to the house of the second accused by his daughter who was in love with
him. The de facto complainant went to her house only because she had threatened to commit suicide in case he did not go. After reaching there, she informed him that her marriage was being fixed with another man and wanted his interference. In the process, the accused persons reached there and took him inside a room and brutally assaulted him causing the injuries detailed
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
4
above. The applicants state that they are innocent and
the allegations are totally untrue and that a crime was registered against the de facto complainant for trespass and outraging the modesty of the second accused’s daughter. In order to escape from that case, a false case has been foisted against the applicants. Moreover, the applicants do not have any criminal antecedents. Hence, they seek anticipatory bail.
be recovered and there is specific evidence in the form of mobile conversations between the second accused's daughter and the defacto complainant indicating that it was the daughter of the second accused who had invited him to their house. There are also materials to prove the intimacy between the de facto complainant and the girl. That would substantiate the prosecution case justifying the de facto complainant going to the scene of occurrence and consequently, being brutally
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
5
assaulted in the manner as alleged.
applicants states that the second accused is a person with 50% handicap and therefore, the possibility of his involvement in the alleged assault cannot be believed.
applicants at least at this stage. The de facto complainant was invited by the daughter of the second
accused and subsequently brutally manhandled by her
relatives. He had sustained grave injuries and the weapons used will have to be recovered. Therefore,
this is not a case where the exceptional remedy of
anticipatory bail can be granted to the applicants.
a direction to the applicants to surrender before the
investigating officer within two weeks. In the event
of their being arrested, after interrogation and
recovery, if any, they shall be produced before the
Bail Appl..No.6903 OF 2020
jurisdictional court where they are at liberty to apply
for regular bail, which shall be considered and preferably disposed of on the very same day also considering the mitigating circumstances regarding the second accused pointed out by the learned counsel.
The bail application is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON
JUDGE
jg
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to accused A1 and A2 in an assault case involving serious injuries.
Whether the prosecution version is more probable than the defence regarding the incident causing allegations of assault and trespass.
Whether the second accused's handicap precludes his involvement in the alleged assault leading to bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
NAZEER
SAJEEV
STATE OF KERALA
ASHOK MENON
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
