Allowed

Rivaj P.V v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2023Bail Appl./210/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted regular bail to the accused in a case involving assault, robbery, and theft of a mobile phone, imposing stringent conditions including appearance before the Investigating Officer and prohibition on committing further offences.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted conditioned on bond of Rs.50,000, appearance before IO weekly, passport surrender, and no commission of further offences.

Rivaj P.V 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 A. BADHARUDEEN WEDNESDAY, THE 15^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶4

BAIL APPL. NO. 210 OF 2023

¶5

CRIME NO.625/2022 OF PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION

¶6

APPLICANT/ACCUSED

¶7

RIVAJ P.V, AGED 38 YEARS S/O KHALID, NAZEEMA MANZIL, KORAN PEEDIKA, PARIYARAM AMSOM, NOW RESIDING AT UNDAPPARAMBA, THALIPPARAMBA AMSOM, KANNUR DT., PIN – 670141. BY ADVS. M.MUHAMMED SHAFI T.RASINI AYISHA AFRIN A.V.K.

¶8

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

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

¶10

P G MANU, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.03.2023, THE COURT ON 15.03.2023, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

B.A.No.210/2023 2

¶13

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

¶14

================================

¶15

B.A.No. 21 0 of 2023

¶16

================================

¶17

Dated this the 15th day of March, 2023

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

Regular bail plea at the instance of the 1 st accused in Crime No.625/2022 of Pariyaram Medical College Police Station, Kannur

¶20

. is the crux of this petition

¶21

2 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the . case diary as such

¶22

3 . The prosecution case is that at about 18.30 hours on

¶23

27.09.2022, the accused herein wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant, assaulted him and inflicted injuries to him using an iron rod with intention to kill him and thereafter the mobile phone

¶24

belonged to the defacto complainant worth Rs.17,000/- was robbed

¶25

away. Pursuant to this occurrence, crime alleging commission of

¶26

offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 392, 506(i) and 500

¶27

B.A.No.210/2023 3

¶28

r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered.

¶29

4 . It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶30

that the petitioner is innocent and the allegations are false. According to him, initially anticipatory bail application was filed by the petitioner along with the 2 nd accused as per B.A.No.8805/2022, and this Court dismissed the bail plea at the instance of the petitioner while allowing that of the 2 nd accused. Thereafter the petitioner was arrested in this crime on 30.12.2022 and has been in custody thereafter. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is innocent and the petitioner is an active worker of Muslim Youth League and he had been implicated in many politically motivated cases. It is submitted that the allegations are false and the defacto complainant used to send obscene messages to the wife of the petitioner and the same was questioned by the petitioner. Difference of opinion arose out of the defacto complainant and the 1 st accused, led to registration of this crime. Highlighting the petitioner’s custody

¶31

B.A.No.210/2023 4

¶32

from 30.12.2022 and progress of the investigation, the learned counsel for the petitioner pressed for grant of bail.

¶33

5 . Whereas the learned Public Prosecutor zealously

¶34

opposed bail on the submission that the mobile phone worth Rs.17,000/- belonged to the defacto complainant was robbed by the accused herein with intention to get his personal details and to send obscene messages to the friends and relatives of the defacto complainant. It is also submitted that the petitioner is a hard core criminal and he has involvement in 20 crimes at present. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a person involved in political crimes alone, could not be justified by the list of cases he got involved, inclusive of offences under Sections 365, 452, 330, 307 etc. Therefore, the learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed bail on the ground that if the petitioner would be released on bail, he would repeat similar crimes and therefore his trial shall be completed keeping him in

¶35

B.A.No.210/2023 5

¶36

custody.

¶37

6 . In this connection, it is submitted by the learned counsel

¶38

for the petitioner that in seven crimes, the petitioner was acquitted.

¶39

The following are the antecedents of the petitioner reported:

¶40

“In Pariyaram Medical College Police Station

¶41

i. Cr.No.235/2011 u/s 341, 323, 324, 326 r/w 34 IPC; ii. Cr.No.143/13 u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 IPC; iii . Cr.No.177/2013 u/s 143, 147, 353, 294(b), 506(i) r/w 149 IPC; iv . Cr.No.119/2015; v . Cr.No.135/15 KAAPA; vi . Cr.No.13/2020 u/s 447, 427 IPC; vii. Cr.No.649/2020 u/s 342, 365, 395 IPC; viii. Cr.No.654/20 u/ 107 Cr.P.C In Taliparamba Police Station

¶42

ix . Cr.No.54/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 506(ii) r/w 149 IPC; x . Cr.No.55/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 332, 435, 427 r/w 149 IPC, Sec.3(2)

¶43

of PDPP Act and 3 & 5 of ES Act;

¶44

xi . Cr.No.57/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 447, 427 r/w 149 IPC;

¶45

xii. Cr.No.58/09 u/ 143, 147, 148, 457, 435, 427 r/w 149 IPC;

¶46

B.A.No.210/2023 6

¶47

xiii. Cr.No.60/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 427, 506(ii) r/w 149 IPC;

¶48

xiv. Cr.No.706/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 307, 332, 395, 427 r/w 149 IPC &

¶49

Sec.3(2) of PDPP Act;

¶50

xv. Cr.No.845/2010 u/s 143, 147, 353, 294(b), 506(i) r/w 149 IPC.

¶51

In Payanangadi Police Station

¶52

xvi. Cr.No.33/09 u/s 143, 147, 148, 149, 324 IPC;

¶53

xvii. C.R.No.11/2011 U/S 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 354, 452, 506 IPC;

¶54

xviii. Cr.No.14/2011 u/s 308, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 341 IPC;

¶55

In Tirur Police Station, Malappuram district

¶56

xix. Cr.No.975/2020 u/s 451, 394 r/w 34 IPC.”

¶57

7. It is true that in some crimes, the accused was acquitted.

¶58

However, his involvement in repeated crimes of serious nature as

¶59

could be read out from the nature of offences extracted herein

¶60

above could not be viewed lightly. It is relevant that the petitioner was detained under KAAPA| during 2015 and proceedings initiated under Section 109 of the Cr.P.C and the said proceedings dropped on 08.12.2020. Thus it appears that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has no respect to law. In this case, the recovery of

¶61

B.A.No.210/2023 7

¶62

the mobile phone as well as motor bike were already effected. Therefore, in consideration of his custody from 31.12.2022 (75 days) and the progress of the investigation, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail on imposing stringent conditions and one among the conditions is that the petitioner shall not involve in any other crime during the currency of bail hereby granted and any such event, if reported or came to the notice of this Court, the same alone shall be a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

¶63

In the result, the petition stands allowed and the petitioner shall be released on bail on the following conditions:

¶64

i. Accused/petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court concerned.

¶65

ii. Accused/petitioner shall not intimidate the witnesses or tamper with evidence. He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall be available for trial. He shall visit the Investigating

¶66

B.A.No.210/2023 8

¶67

Officer on every Monday in between 9 a.m and 12 noon for a period of two months and also appear before the Investigating

¶68

Officer as and when directed.

¶69

iii. Accused/petitioner shall not leave India without prior permission of the jurisdictional court.

¶70

iv. The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, within 7 days from the date of his release, before the trial court. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit in this regard on the date of execution of the bond or within 3 days thereafter.

¶71

v. Accused/petitioner shall not involve in any other offence

¶72

during the currency of bail and any such event, if reported or came to the notice of this Court, the same alone shall be a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(A. BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE)

¶75

rtr/

Rivaj P.V v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rivaj P.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

Shinumon a Vs State of Kerala

Baby Vs State of Kerala

Favas K.P Vs State of Kerala

Alifkhan Abdul Ahad Safeena Vs State of Kerala

Abins Vs State of Kerala

Ratheesh Kumar Vs State of Kerala