Allowed

Saran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Mar 2023Bail Appl./1128/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC, the Kerala High Court allowed pre-arrest bail to the first accused facing charges of punishable offences under the IPC, including attempt to murder and affray. Considering the petitioner is a student willing to cooperate with investigation and aid in weapon recovery, the court granted bail on standard conditions with a direction to surrender for interr

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail subject to surrender for interrogation, execution of bail bond with sureties, recovery of weapon, and no interference with investigation.

Saran Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 25TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 1128 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.96/2023 OF MALAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION,

¶7

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶9

SARAN AGED 18 YEARS, S/O. SASI.K, K.S NIVAS, NETHAJI NAGAR VILAPPILSALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695573 BY ADVS. SALIM V.S. A.M.FOUSI

¶10

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶11

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

¶12

SR PP - P G MANU

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No. 1128 of 2023

ORDER

Dated this the 16^th day of March, 2023

¶18

This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking pre-arrest bail and the petitioner is the 1^st accused in crime No.96/2023 of Malayinkeezhu Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, where the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 149, 341, 323, 294(b), 324 and 308 of IPC.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant materials form part of the case diary produced by the learned Public Prosecutor including the copy of wound certificate as that of Suraj, who sustained injuries in this occurrence.

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that, the accused herein formed into an unlawful assembly after sharing common intention with knowledge that they are all members of the said assembly, armed with deadly weapons. Thereafter, they assaulted the defacto complainant with intention to commit culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The specific allegation is that, the 1^st accused used a reaper to cause injuries on the chest and head of the

¶21

B.A.No. 1128 of 2023

¶22

¶23

defacto complainant. Though, the defacto complainant survived, he sustained injuries. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of the above offences.

¶24

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is innocent and the allegations are false. According to him, the petitioner as well as the defacto complainant and other accused are all students and the overt acts alleged by the prosecution by itself did not constitute any offence under Section 308 of IPC, though the defacto complainant sustained some minor injuries. Submitting so, the learned counsel for the petitioner pursued the relief of anticipatory bail with offer to co-operate with the investigation, in the matter of recovery of the reaper also.

¶25

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, the petitioner is a first time offender. However, he has produced copy of wound certificate and the relevant records to substantiate offences alleged to be committed by the petitioner, while opposing grant of anticipatory bail, highlighting the necessity of recovery of reaper at the instance of the petitioner.

¶26

On perusal of the prosecution records, the allegations of the prosecution made out prima facie . The prosecution specifically would allege that, the petitioner herein who got arrayed as the 1^st accused attacked the defacto complainant by using a reaper and

¶27

B.A.No. 1128 of 2023

¶28

¶29

the same caused “lacerated wound 4x0.5 cm on scalp left frontal region and abrasion on left ear pinna 0.5x0.5 cm and abrasion on left forearm 3x0.5 cm.”

¶30

However, in consideration of the fact that, petitioner is a student, I am of the view that, investigation is possible even without custodial interrogation of the petitioner, since, the petitioner expressed his willingness to aid the prosecution in the matter of recovery of weapon during his 'deemed custody'. Thus, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for interrogation and to co-operate with the investigation. The petitioner is also directed to assist the Investigating Officer to recover the reaper alleged to be used by him, without fail, as conceded.

¶31

Therefore, this petition stands allowed. The petitioner is enlarged on bail on conditions:

¶32

i. The petitioner shall surrender before the

¶33

Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioner, record his statement and recover the reaper alleged to be used by the petitioner, as conceded. In the event of his arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce

¶34

B.A.No. 1128 of 2023

¶35

¶36

the petitioner before the Jurisdictional Court on the date o f arrest itself.

¶37

ii. On such production, Jurisdictional Court shall release the petitioner on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each, by himself and by two sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶38

iii. The petitioner shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so.

¶39

iv. The petitioner, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

¶40

v. The petitioner shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

¶41

Sd/-

¶42

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶43

Saran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saran 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

Rivaj P.V Vs State of Kerala

Alifkhan Abdul Ahad Safeena Vs State of Kerala

Abins Vs State of Kerala

Karun Sivadas Vs State of Kerala

Laibu K.Sabu Vs State of Kerala

Niju Peter Vs State of Kerala