Allowed

Sudhi.K.v, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Dec 2021Bail Appl./7147/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. The petitioners were accused of affray and assault. The court held that custodial interrogation of the young accused was unnecessary given the retaliation context and no evidence of organised crime, setting bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioners directed to appear before IO within two weeks; bond of Rs.50,000 with sureties required if arrested.

Sudhi.K.v, Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 7147 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.480 OF 2021 OF THRITHALA POLICE STATION,

¶7

PALAKKAD

¶8

PETITIONERS:

¶9

1 SUDHI.K.V, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.MAKKU, KANJIRAVALAPPIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKE KODANAD, (POST) MEZHATHUR, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 534. 2 SARATH, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.ARJUNAN, THADATHIL HOUSE, ULLANOOR, (POST) THRITHALA, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 534.

¶10

3 UNNIKRISHNAN.O.S., AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.SIVARAMAN, OTTUPURATHU VALAPPPIL HOUSE, (POST) THRITHALA, (VIA) THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 534.

¶11

BY ADV P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD)

¶12

RESPONDENT:

¶13

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

¶14

SMT.C.SEENA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶16

ON 14.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.7147 of 2021

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, J.

¶21

----------------------------------------------------------B.A.No. 7147 of 2021

¶22

----------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 14^th day of December, 2021

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶25

The petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 4 in crime No.480 of 2021 of Thrithala Police Station. The offences alleged are under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.

¶26

The allegations are that on 17.08.2021 at about 6.00 p.m., the 1^st petitioner was manhandled by Subin, the de facto complainant. On the complaint of the mother of the 1^st petitioner, Crime No.390 of 2021 was registered in Chalissery Police Station. The 1^st petitioner was admitted in hospital and

¶27

had undergone treatment for the injuries sustained in that incident. Thereafter, on 19.08.2021 at about 5.15 p.m. when the de facto complainant was riding in a motorcycle along with his friend and reached near Mosco City, accused Nos.1 to 4 in

¶28

¶29

B.A.No.7147 of 2021

¶30

this crime, blocked them and the 1^st accused slapped and attacked the de facto complainant using an iron rod. Accused Nos.2 and 3 joined by slapping the de facto complainant. The 4^th accused, who reached there by that time fisted the de facto complainant and when he fell down, kicked him on the face. As a result of the attack, the de facto complainant and his friend sustained injuries. The de facto complainant sustained a fracture to the nasal bone and his friend Jishnu sustained a mandible fracture. The accused have committed the offences in furtherance of their common intention.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶32

The learned Public Prosecutor has placed on record a report of the investigating officer.

¶33

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that this was not an organised crime and occasioned as a retaliation of the earlier incident, wherein the 1^st petitioner was attacked and seriously injured. The nature of the allegations would show that the 1^st accused with

¶34

¶35

B.A.No.7147 of 2021

¶36

preparation of attacking the de facto complainant was waiting there; but it is not able to say so in the case of others, especially in the wake of the averment that the 4^th accused reached the spot during the course of the incident. The 1^st accused alone is the person, who used the weapon, which is an iron rod. The weapon has already been seized by the investigating agency from the scene of occurrence. As regards the identity of persons, there cannot be any dispute since the persons are known to each other, even earlier. Considering those facts, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners, who are all youngsters, is not necessary.

¶37

Under the above circumstances, I am inclined to allow the application. The petitioners are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and in the event of their being arrested, they shall be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) by them along with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, and on the following conditions:

¶38

¶39

B.A.No.7147 of 2021

¶40

(i) Once they are released on bail, they shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. for a period of three months or till the final report is filed, whichever is earlier;

¶41

(ii) They shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence; and

¶42

(iii) During the bail period, they shall not get involved in any offence.

¶43

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶46

dkr

Sudhi.K.v, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhi.K.v, 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

Aboobacker Vs State of Kerala

Jolly Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shaheem Vs State of Kerala

Midhulaj Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shafi Vs State of Kerala

Abijith A.S. Vs State of Kerala