Allowed

Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Aug 2021Bail Appl./6056/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application before the Kerala High Court, the court granted bail to the 7th accused in a murder-case. Considering that all other accused were on bail and investigation was complete, the court ordered release subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner held on bail for Rs. 1 lakh with two solvent sureties, subject to conditions including non-residence in Alappuzha and surrender of passport.

Unnikrishnan Vs State of Kerala — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 6056 OF 2021

¶6

(CRIME NO.284/2021 OF VALLIKUNNAM POLICE STATION, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT)

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 1320/2021 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA

¶8

PETITIONER/7TH ACCUSED:

¶9

UNNIKRISHNAN AGED 24 YEARS SHEEJA BHAVANAM, KUNNAMKAMKUZHI, THAMARAKULAM MAVELIKARA, NOW RESIDING AT BIJU BHAVANAM, ELIPPAKULAM MURI, VALLIKUNNAM, MAVELIKARA, ALAPUZHA-690 501

¶10

BY ADVS. MANU HARSHAKUMAR MARY ANN SAJI

¶11

RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNKAULAM-682 031

¶13

2 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALLIKUNNAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA-690 501, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,

¶14

BY ADVS. ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SHRI.P.NARAYANAN, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

SR.PP - SRI. C.K.SURESH

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2021,

¶17

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

BAIL APPL. NO. 6056 OF 2021

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. Petitioner is the 7^th accused in Crime No.284 of 2021

¶22

of Vallikunnam police station in Alappuzha district, which was registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 307, 302 of the IPC read with Section 149 of the IPC.

¶23

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he had

¶24

facilitated the other accused in the accomplishment of the crime in which a 11 year old boy, Abhimanyu was killed and some others were seriously injured. He was arrested for the crime on 23.04.2021 and since then is in judicial custody.

¶25

I heard the learned counsel on both sides.

¶26

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all

¶27

other accused have been granted bail by this Court, except 4^th accused, who has not yet been arrested. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is prepared to abide any condition imposed by this Court.

¶28

The learned Public Prosecutor has seriously opposed the

¶29

application. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, he is a

¶30

¶31

BAIL APPL. NO. 6056 OF 2021

¶32

history sheeter, in the sense that, including this crime, he has two murder cases to his credit, besides one case under Section 308 of the IPC and two other hurt cases.

¶33

It has come out that, he is in judicial custody for the last 111 days. The investigation has already been over and charge sheet laid. The policy of the Courts is not to detain such persons in custody unless, overwhelming reasons are made out. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, he is on bail in all other cases, that his parents are abroad and he is only 24 years, that he will lead a peaceful life, obeying any condition imposed by this Court.

¶34

Having heard counsel on both sides and taking into account the fact that, all other accused, except 4^th accused, who is not yet arrested, have been granted bail no purpose will be served in detaining the petitioner further in custody. Moreover, during the pandemic condition, High Power Committee appointed by the Apex Court has issued guidelines for easing over crowding in prisons. True that the petitioner does not bear good antecedents. But, so long as all other accused, including the prime accused have been released, there is no reason to single out the petitioner.

¶35

¶36

BAIL APPL. NO. 6056 OF 2021

¶37

Therefore, the petitioner shall be released on bail on the

¶38

following conditions:-

¶39

i) Petitioner shall execute bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kayamkulam.

¶40

ii) He shall not enter Alappuzha revenue district except for the purpose of attending the Court.

¶41

iii) He shall surrender his passport before the jurisdictional Court and if her does not have one, file an affidavit to that effect shall be produced before the jurisdictional Court.

¶42

iv) He shall not try to contact or influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

¶43

v) He shall not leave the country without permission of the trial court;

¶44

vi) He shall not involve in any crime during the period on

¶45

bail;

¶46

vii) He shall appear before the trial Court on all dates of posting;

¶47

viii) Petitioner shall strictly abide the various guidelines

¶48

BAIL APPL. NO. 6056 OF 2021

¶49

¶50

issued by the State and Central Governments with respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

¶51

ix) If any of the above conditions are violated by the

¶52

petitioner, the jurisdictional court will be a liberty to cancel the bail,

¶53

in accordance with law.

¶54

Bail Application is allowed as above.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE

RMV/12/08/2021

Unnikrishnan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Unnikrishnan 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

Sherin v John Vs State of Kerala

Ajayan Vs State of Kerala

Hijas Vs State of Kerala

Abhijith @ Abhi Vs State of Kerala

Athul Vs State of Kerala

Pranav Vs State of Kerala