Disposed

Praveen Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Jul 2023Bail Appl./2782/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of an anticipatory bail application filed by two accused persons facing charges of rioting and assault. The court directed their surrender for limited interrogation and subsequent release on bail subject to strict conditions regarding investigation cooperation and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender for limited custody interrogation and then released on bail upon executing a bond with sureties subject to specific conditions.

Praveen Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1945
BAIL APPL. NO. 2782 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

1PRAVEEN KUMAR
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O DILEEP KUMAR, PRAVEEN NIVAS, IRUKUNNAM,
AMBALAKARAMURI, KOTTARAKARA, PIN - 691532
2KRISHNA PRADEEP
S/O UNNI KRISHNAN, IRUKUNNAM, AMBALAKARAMURI,
KOTTARAKARA, PIN - 691532
BY ADVS.
VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN
B.ANUSREE
RESHMA UNNIKRISHNAN
MIRAL K.JOY

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2SANJAY KUMAR
S/O SASIDHARAN, PARAMBITHARA VEED, IRUKKUNU, AMBALAKARA
P.O, KOTTARAKARA, PIN - 691532
BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶9

OTHER PRESENT:

¶10

ADV. SREEJA V - SR PP

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶13

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

Dated this the 21st day of July, 2023

¶16

This bail application is filed under Section

¶17

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking
anticipatory bail.

¶18

2.The petitioners are the accused No.2 & 3 in
Crime No. 724/2023 of Kottarakara Police Station.
The crime was registered for the offences under
Sec.143, 147, 148, 323, 324 & 149 of the Indian
Penal Code. The prosecution case is that, on
17.03.2023, due to the enmity between two factions
of devotees of the Muzhukunu Ayiravalli Temple, in
connection with the election of the governing body
of the said temple, the accused Nos. 1 to 6 formed
themselves into an unlawful assembly and assaulted
the defacto complainant with an iron rod and wooden
stick, thereby causing serious injuries to him. The
crime was registered in such circumstances and as
the petitioners apprehend arrest in the said case,
this application for anticipatory bail is
submitted.

¶19

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶20

¶21

3.Heard Sri. Vishnu Bhuvanendaran, the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
Smt. Sreeja V., the learned Senior Public
Prosecutor for the State.

¶22

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioners are innocent of all
the allegations.According to him, there occurred
some heated exchange of words and commotion in
connection with the election of the said case and
the allegations of assault as against the
petitioners are false. It is also pointed out
that a counter case is also registered against
the defacto complainant at the instance of the
first accused. The delay of 2 days in reporting
the matter is also highlighted as one of the
grounds to substantiate his contention of false
nature of the allegations.

¶23

5. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the

¶24

other hand, opposes this application by pointing

¶25

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶26

¶27

out that as regards the first petitioner/2nd
accused, there is a specific allegation that he
assaulted the defacto complainant with a wooden
stick, thereby causing fracture on his hand. The
matter is under investigation and therefore,
dismissal of the application was sought.

¶28

6.I have gone through the records. It is

¶29

true that there are certain overt acts alleged
against the petitioners. But it is reported that
there is a case and a counter case. The incident
occurred as part of a dispute between two
factions of people who are devotees of Muzhukunu
Ayiravalli Temple, in connection with the election
of the governing body of the said temple. No
criminal antecedents of the petitioners are brought
to my notice. It is discernible that the weapons
allegedly used by the petitioners were recovered as
well. In such circumstances, I am of the view that
the limited custody of petitioners for the purpose
of interrogation would serve the ends of justice.

¶30

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶31

¶32

 In the result, this application is disposed of

¶33

with the following directions:-

¶34

i The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting themselves to interrogation.

¶35

iiAfter interrogation, the petitionersshall be
released on bail on the very same day of surrender
upon the petitioners executing a bond for Rs
1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the
satisfaction of the Investigating Officer

¶36

iii The petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

¶37

ivThepetitionersshallappearbeforethe

¶38

Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00
a.m on all alternate Saturdays until the filing of
the final report.

¶39

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶40

¶41

vThe petitionersshall also appear before the

¶42

Investigating Officer as and when required.

¶43

viThe petitioners shall not commit any offence of
similar nature while on bail.

¶44

viiThe petitioners 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.

¶45

viiiThe petitioners shall not leave India without
the permission of the Jurisdictional Court.

¶46

In case of violation of any of the above

¶47

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

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
 JUDGE

¶50

SM

¶51

B.A.No.2782 of 2023

¶52

¶53

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2782/2023

¶54

PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-ICITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR DATED 19.03.2023 IN
CRIME NO. 724/2023 OF KOTTARAKARA POLICE
STATION
Annexure-IITRUE COPY OF THE OUT-PATIENT REGISTRATION
CARD OF SUDHEESH ISSUED BY THE TALUK HEAD
QUARTERS HOSPITAL KOLLAM, KOTTARAKARA DATED
17.03.2023

Praveen Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveen Kumar 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

Manoj Borah Vs State of Kerala

Sooraj J Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

Sooraj J Vs State of Kerala Represented by the Public Prosecutor

Abinsha Maideen Vs State of Kerala

Sujith Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shabeer M.P Vs State of Kerala