Allowed

Athulraj K v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC24 Jul 2023Bail Appl./122/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of three connected anticipatory bail applications pending since 2022. The Court allowed the applications but directed petitioners to cooperate with investigation, appear before the Investigating Officer twice a week, and submit to bail bonds upon arrest recommendation.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed with conditions to appear before Investigating Officer twice a week, cooperate with investigation, and execute bond on arrest.

Athulraj K Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 10344 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER MC 1608/2022 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

AJI@AJITH KUMAR. V AGED 32 YEARS, S/O AJAYAKUMAR, VILAMBATH(H), PERUMBILLISSERY, CHERPU.P.O., CHEVVOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561

¶9

BY ADVS. C.A.ANOOP R.KRISHNA VANESHA VISWAMBARAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHERPU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561 3 JEEJO YOHANNAN AGED 46 YEARS S/O YOHANNAN, KURUTHUKULAM(H), CHEVVOOR DESOM, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561 BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TISSY ROSE K CHERIYAN KAYYALAPARAMPIL PREETHA.K(K/000102/2019)

¶12

SMT. MAYA M.N., PP

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl.122/2023, 10343/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶15

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶17

PRESENT

¶18

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 122 OF 2023

¶19

PETITIONER:

¶20

ATHULRAJ K

¶21

AGED 23 YEARS, S/O K.K.RAJAN, KALLIYATH HOUSE, NALLUKUNNATHUSSERY, P.O PERINCHEERY, THRISSUR, KERALA PIN - 680586

¶22

BY ADV SARATH BABU KOTTAKKAL

¶23

RESPONDENT:

¶24

STATE OF KERALA

¶25

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

¶26

BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶27

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl.10344/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶29

¶30

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶33

MONDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JULY 2023 / 2ND SRAVANA, 1945

¶34

BAIL APPL. NO. 10343 OF 2022

¶35

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT MC 1608/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS

¶36

COURT,THRISSUR

¶37

PETITIONERS:

¶38

1 VISHNU.V.V AGED 30 YEARS, S/O VENUGOPAL, VAZHELIPARAMBIL (H), PERUMBILLISSERY (WEST), CHERPU P.O, CHEVVOOR, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561

¶39

2 VYSHAK.K AGED 33 YEARS S/O JAYASINGH, KAVUMATHIL(H), PERUMBILLISSERY P.O., CHERPU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561

¶40

BY ADVS. C.A.ANOOP R.KRISHNA VANESHA VISWAMBARAN

¶41

RESPONDENTS:

¶42

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

¶43

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHERPU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, PIN - 680561

¶44

BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TISSY ROSE K CHERIYAN

¶45

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..10344/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶46

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶47

¶48

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

¶49

--------------------------------------------------

¶50

B.A.Nos.10343, 10344 of 2022 and 122 of 2023

¶51

-------------------------------------------------

¶52

Dated this the 24^th day of July, 2023

¶53

O R D E R

¶54

These Bail Applications are connected and are filed under

¶55

Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and therefore,

¶56

I am disposing of these bail applications by a common judgment.

¶57

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.926/2022 of Cherpu Police Station. Above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 326 r/w 34 of the IPC.

¶58

The Prosecution case in brief is that the petitioners and the other accused with a common intention attacked the defacto complainant in a public place and the defacto complainant sustained a nasal bone injury.

¶59

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶60

learned Public Prosecutor.

¶61

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶62

¶63

When these bail applications came up for consideration,

¶64

this Court directed the Investigating Officer not to arrest the petitioners. The bail application is pending before this Court from 2022 onwards. Even now the above order is in force.

¶65

Today, the matter was heard in detail. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the defacto complainant sustained serious injury and the weapon of the offence is not recovered. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant also submitted that he is a police officer and he was attacked in a public function in which his daughter's dance program was going on. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant also opposes the bail application.

¶66

It is true that the allegation against the petitioners are very serious. The defacto complainant sustained serious injury also. But since, these bail applications are pending before this Court from 2022 onwards, it will be unjustifiable to dismiss these bail applications at this distance of time. Moreover, the prosecution also have not filed any petition to vacate the

¶67

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶68

¶69

interim order already passed by this Court and that order is in force even now. But considering the facts and circumstances of the case, there can be a direction to the petitioners to cooperate with the investigation. The petitioners can be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer twice in a week so that the investigation can be completed immediately.

¶70

Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that, the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870) , after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that, the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.

¶71

Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:

¶72

Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer

¶73

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶74

¶75

within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

¶76

After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioners, they shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;

¶77

Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶78

Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court;

¶79

Petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected;

¶80

BAIL APPL. NOS.10344, 10343/22 & 122/23

¶81

¶82

The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating

¶83

Officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 11.00 a.m., till final report is filed.

¶84

If any of the above conditions are violated by the

¶85

petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this

¶86

Court.

¶87

Sd/P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶88

SVP

Athulraj K v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Athulraj 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Philipose K.a, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Shibu K.C. Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Balan O.K. Vs the State of Kerala

Sibil Babu Vs State of Kerala

Faisal Vs State of Kerala

Rajini K Vs Station House Officer