Allowed

Riju.N.K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Oct 2021Bail Appl./4834/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted pre-arrest bail to accused Nos. 8 to 12 in a criminal case involving unlawful assembly and affray. Court held lack of specific allegations against them justified bail despite main accused already being released, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on Rs. 50,000 bond with two sureties each; conditions imposed for appearance, cooperation, no tampering, and no new offences.

Riju.N.K Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. THURSDAY, THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 6TH KARTHIKA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶6

(CRIME NO.9/2021 OF TALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION)

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶8

1 RIJU.N.K AGED 35 YEARS THEKKE PURAYIL HOUSE PANANGATTOOR KUTTIYERI KANNUR, PIN - 670142 2 ABHILASH.K.V AGED 25 YEARS KADAVATH VALAPPIL HOUSE PANANGATTOOR KUTTIYERI KANNUR, PIN - 670142 3 KRISHNAN.N.V AGED 60 YEARS NADUVAM VEETIL PANANGATTOOR KUTTIYERI KANNUR, PIN - 670142 4 AMAL RAJ.K.V AGED 22 YEARS KADAVATH VALAPPIL PANANGATTOOR KUTTIYERI KANNUR, PIN - 670142 5 ADARSH.P.P AGED 19 YEARS PUTHIYA PURAYIL PANANGATTOOR KUTTIYERI KANNUR, PIN - 670142

¶9

BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶10

¶11

BY ADV B.MUHAMMED SHAHEEL

¶12

RESPONDENT

¶13

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

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SMT. SREEJA.V- SR.PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.9 of 2021 of Thaliparamba police station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 323, 324, 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners arraigned as accused Nos.8 to 12 have filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

The allegation levelled against the accused is that on 02.01.2021 at about 7.50 p.m they have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons in prosecution of their common object, encircled the defacto complainant and attacked him. They have used wooden stick and iron rod to attack the defacto complainant due to their political rivalry towards him and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶23

The main allegation was raised against accused Nos.1 to

¶24

The defacto complainant had specific allegation that accused

¶25

BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶26

¶27

Nos.1 to 7 had caused injuries to him. No specific overt act had been alleged against these petitioners/accused Nos.8 to 12. Prearrest bail has been granted to accused Nos.1 to 7 by this Court as early as 3^rd February, 2021. Since there is no specific allegation against these petitioners for having committed the alleged offences, the learned counsel for the petitioners seek prearrest bail, for them.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submit that pre-arrest bail has been granted to the main accused, ie; accused Nos.1 to 7 and weapons used by them had already been recovered. So custodial interrogation is found not necessary.

¶29

Considering the said facts, I think that these petitioners can be granted pre-arrest bail imposing the following conditions.

¶30

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each in the event of arrest by the police in connection with the above crime.

¶31

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him in

¶32

BAIL APPL. NO. 4834 OF 2021

¶33

¶34

writing. Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.

¶35

(iii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶36

(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

¶37

In case of violation of any of the above

¶38

conditions, the jurisdictional court is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

smm

Riju.N.K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riju.N.K 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

John Varghese. v Vs State of Kerala

Binoy Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Sinoj Varghese Alex Vs State of Kerala

Paulose Kallarackal Vs State of Kerala

Binshad Vs State of Kerala

Veera Kumar, Vs State of Kerala