Allowed

Akhilraj Rs v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

Kerala HC2 Jun 2023Bail Appl./1755/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala granted regular bail to accused under Section 439 CrPC in a murder attempt case involving petrol. Investigation concluded; trial pending. Court imposed strict conditions regarding non-contact, non-attirement in Kollam District, and surrender of passport.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with sureties, non-contact conditions, restriction on entering Kollam District, and surrender of passport.

Akhilraj Rs Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Public… — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

B.A.No.1755/23

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1945

¶7

BAIL APPL. NO. 1755 OF 2023

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTBail Appl. 434/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶9

KERALA

¶10

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶11

AKHILRAJ R.S., AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.RAJENDRAN, AKHILNIVAS, KOTTATHALA P.O, KOTTARACKARA KOLLAM (DIST), PIN – 691 507.

¶12

BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV S V.VINAY(K/355/2009) M.S.ANEER(K/644/2013) SARATH K.P.(K/001467/2021) PRERITH PHILIP JOSEPH(K/000736/2015) ANILKUMAR C.R.(K/001190/2020)

¶13

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 031.

¶15

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM (DIST), PIN – 691 506.

¶16

SMT.SEETHA S.- SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

B.A.No.1755/23

O R D E R

This is an application filed u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail.

¶22

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.2893 of 2022 of Kottarakkara Police Station. Initially, the crime was registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324 and 307 IPC. Later, offence under Section 326 A IPC was also incorporated.

¶23

The prosecution case is as follows:

¶24

The de facto complainant is the wife of the petitioner, and between them, certain litigations in connection with the matrimonial disputes are pending at various courts. On 17.12.2022, while the de facto complainant was returning from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kottarakkara after attending the court in connection with one of the litigations between the parties, the petitioner followed her and obstructed her. Thereafter, the petitioner poured petrol on the body of the de facto complainant and set her ablaze. The crime was

¶25

B.A.No.1755/23

¶26

¶27

registered in such circumstances. As part of the investigation, the petitioner was arrested on 17.12.2022; since then, he has been under judicial detention. This bail application is submitted by the petitioner in such circumstances. Heard Sri. S. Rajeev, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha S., learned Senior Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent of all the allegations. Further, it is submitted that the petitioner is prepared to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Now the investigation is over, and the final report has been submitted. In such circumstances, he seeks bail.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the aforesaid application. It is pointed out that this is a case in which the petitioner came to the place of occurrence with all preparations in a determined manner to commit the murder of the de facto complainant. Allegations raised against the petitioner are serious in nature. Considering the way in which the offence was committed, it is evident that if the

¶30

B.A.No.1755/23

¶31

¶32

petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to cause threat to the safety of the victim, and it may adversely affect the trial as well, contends the learned Public Prosecutor. Therefore, it is pointed out that, the bail cannot be granted to the petitioner even though the final report has been submitted.

¶33

I have gone through the records and heard the contentions raised by both sides. It is true that there are serious allegations raised against the petitioner. However, the fact remains that the petitioner has been in custody since 17.12.2022 and more than six months have elapsed since the date of his arrest. The investigation is already over, and the final report submitted. The trial of the case is likely to take some time. As regards the apprehension voiced by the learned Public Prosecutor as to the safety of the victim, I am of the view that appropriate conditions can be incorporated to ensure the safety of the victim.

¶34

In such circumstances, this bail application is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to the following conditions:

¶35

B.A.No.1755/23

¶36

¶37

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 1,00,000/(Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

¶38

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigation officer as and when required. (iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail. (iv) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. (v) The petitioner shall not enter into the Kollam District until further orders, except to attend the court in compliance of the conditions imposed by this Court and also for attending the court in connection with matrimonial disputes pending between the petitioner and de facto complainant

¶39

(vi) The petitioner shall surrender the passport before the jurisdictional court. If he does not have the passport, an affidavit to that effect shall be filed.

¶40

B.A.No.1755/23

¶41

¶42

(vi) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.

¶43

In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the

¶44

jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

JUDGE

DG/2.6.23

B.A.No.1755/23

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1755/2023

¶52

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶53

Annexure1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 25.01.2023 IN BA NO. 434/2023

Akhilraj Rs v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilraj Rs v. State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

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

Muhamnmed Sameer M Vs the Union Territory of Lakshadweep

Sajan Varghese Vs George Thomas

Dr. Janet Vs State of Kerala

K.P. John Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Prasad S P Vs State of Kerala