Partly allowed

Santhosh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Dec 2021Bail Appl./6930/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to two accused persons charged with affray and grievous hurt, directing surrender for interrogation. The bail for a third accused was dismissed as infructuous as he had already been released on bail.

What did the court decide?

1st and 2nd petitioners surrendered, released on bail subject to conditions; 3rd petitioner bail application dismissed as infructuous.

Santhosh Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶7

(CRIME NO.2301/2021 OF VALLARADA POLICE STATION,

¶8

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM)

¶9

PETITIONERS/A1 TO A3

¶10

1 SANTHOSH AGED 38 YEARS S/O.RAJAYYAN, ANJALI BHAVAN, MOTTAKKAVU, MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., KOLLAYIL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

2 SATHEESH, AGED 31 YEARS S/O.THANKASWAMI, VAYALINKAL MELE PUTHENVEEDU, KUDAPPANAMOODU P.O., VELLARADA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

3 RAJESH, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.RAJAYYAN, VELLARATHU VILAKOM, MANCHA VILAKOM P.O., KOLLAYIL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SHAJIN S.HAMEED MELWIN BYJU

¶13

RESPONDENT/STATE:

¶14

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

¶15

SMT SREEJA.V- SR.PP

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioners who are the accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.2301 of 2021 of Vellarada Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 452, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 have moved this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

The 3^rd petitioner who is the 3^rd accused has been arrested and released on bail.

¶22

The prosecution allegation is that on 29.7.2021 at about 10.30 p.m these petitioners along with the other accused have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant, in prosecution of their common object to attack the defacto complainant, have encircled him and manhandled him. The 1^st accused by using a sword inflicted a cut injury on his body which resulted in an avulsion and the 2^nd accused by using an iron rod hit on the left hand of the defacto complainant causing fracture. Thereby they have committed the aforesaid offences.

¶23

Heard both sides.

¶24

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners the

¶25

¶26

BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶27

defacto complainant is the husband of the sister of the 2^nd petitioner. He used to harass his wife and torture her quite often. Thus their relationship had strained and then she had approached the Magistrate court and obtained a protection order. As the relationship has strained she along with her children are residing with the 2^nd petitioner. While so, on the relevant day the defacto complainant came to his residence and harassed her and threatened her minor children. Then she immediately lodged a complaint against him. Thus crime No.2308 of 2021 of Vellarada police station has been registered against the defacto complainant and it is pending. She has also moved before the Judicial First Class Magistrate with an application as he has violated the protection order granted by the court in her favour.

¶28

Infuriated by her action, the defacto complainant has falsely implicated these petitioners in this case. In fact they are totally innocent.

¶29

But the learned Public prosecutor has refuted the claim raised by the petitioners that they are innocent pointing out that all the petitioners were having weapons with them when they attacked the defacto complainant and it was a deliberate one.

¶30

Though the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the defacto complainant was attacked by these petitioners with deadly

¶31

BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶32

¶33

weapons such as sword, iron rod etc., it is fairly admitted by the learned Public Prosecutor on perusal of the wound certificate that he sustained only one injury, that is the fracture. It is also pertinent to note that the 3^rd petitioner /3^rd accused had already been arrested and recovery of the weapon has been affected. The petitioners have absolutely no criminal antecedents. But Annexures B would show that relationship of the defacto complainant and his wife has strained as he has beaten her and her minor children. So she was compelled to approach the Magistrate Court for protection order and now the case is pending before the Magistrate Court. The defacto complainant has two minor children and both of them are residing under the care and protection of the 2^nd petitioner, the brother of his wife.

¶34

Taking into account of all these facts, I think that this petition can be disposed of directing the 1^st and 2^nd petitioners to surrender before the investigating officer on 10.12.2021 between 10.00 a.m and 12.00 noon. Upon their surrender after interrogation they shall be released on bail on the very same day subject to the following conditions:

¶35

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on each of them executing bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand

¶36

BAIL APPL. NO. 6930 OF 2021

¶37

¶38

only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each in the event of arrest by the police in connection with the above crime.

¶39

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him in writing. They shall cooperate with the investigation of the case.

¶40

(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.

¶41

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

¶42

In case of violation of any of the above conditions,

¶43

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

¶44

Petition with respect to 3^rd petitioner/3^rd accused stands dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE

smm

Santhosh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh 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

Prajosh.P, Vs State of Kerala

Ajmal @ Puttu Vs the State of Kerala

Abbas Vs State of Kerala

Pallipattu Raman Haridas Vs State of Kerala

Haneefa Vs State of Kerala

Derin Davis Vs State of Kerala