Allowed

Sumesh v. Station House Officer

Kerala HC2 Mar 2023Bail Appl./754/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala allowed regular bail to accused in crime No. 546/2022 (robbery, attempt to murder). Despite serious charges, bail granted as investigation practically over and petitioners were first-time offenders with no antecedents. Fixed bail bond of Rs. 50,000 and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Judgment allowed bail applications for Rs. 50,000 bond with sureties; directed appearance before IO and court with conditions against tampering.

Sumesh Vs Station House Officer — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 754 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME NO.546/2022 OF WALAYAR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 341/2023 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE

¶8

OF FIRST CLASS -I,PALAKKAD

¶9

PETITIONERS:

¶10

1 SUMESH AGED 31 YEARS S/O. UNNIKRISHNAN, PAMBAMPALLAM P.O., KIZHAKKE ATTAPPALLAM, PALAKKAD-678621, PIN - 678621 2 MANIKANDAN AGED 38 YEARS S/O. LATE MOORTHI, VEDIKKARATH HOUSE, PAMBAMPALLAM P.O., KIZHAKKE ATTAPPALLAM, PALAKKAD-678621., PIN - 678621 BY ADVS. T.R.TARIN P.K.ANIL

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 STATION HOUSE OFFICER VALAYAR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD - 678624, PIN - 678624 2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM – 682031. SRI.P.G.MANU, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶13

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2023 ALONG WITH B.A.NO.1561/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶17

PRESENT

¶18

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶19

THURSDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 1561 OF 2023

¶20

CRIME NO.546/2022 OF Walayar Police Station, Palakkad AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCRMC 5173/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD

¶21

PETITIONERS:

¶22

RAJEEV R AGED 32 YEARS RAMALATHU HOUSE, IRATTIYAL, KODUMBU PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678007 BY ADVS. T.K.SANDEEP VEENA HARIKUMAR SWETHA R.

¶23

RESPONDENTS:

¶24

STATE OF KERALA

¶25

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV.T.V.NEEMA, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶26

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶27

ON 02.03.2023 ALONG WITH B.A.NO.754/2023, THE COURT ON

¶28

THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

¶30

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶31

COMMON ORDER

¶32

Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2023

¶33

Accused No.5 in crime No.546/2022 of Walayar police

¶34

station seeks regular bail in B.A.No.1561/2023. B.A.No.754/2023 is at the instance of accused Nos.8 and 9 in the same crime.

¶35

Heard the respective counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶36

I have perused the relevant documents forming part

¶37

of the case diary placed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶38

The prosecution allegation is that, at 5.00 am on 06.12.2022, as directed by the 8th accused, 9th accused placed lorry bearing registration No.KL-54-L-8826 and restrained movement of Ritz car bearing registration No.KL10-AV-9437 owned and driven by the defacto complainant with intention to rob him. Further allegation is that, thereafter, the accused herein beat on the side glass door of the car by

¶39

¶40

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶41

using an iron rod. Thereby, the door glass was broken. That apart, the defacto complainant also sustained injury on his lip and tooth, as a result of the same. Then the accused brought out the defacto complainant from the car and manhandled. Further, the accused have attacked one Basheer, who accompanied the defacto complainant in the said car. The prosecution allegation further is that, the accused have robbed away Rs.10,07,000/- (Rupees Ten lakh seven thousand only) and mobile phones of the defacto complainant and Basheer. The allegation against the 6th accused is that he had given shelter to accused Nos.1 to 4 for hiding and also given a mobile sim in his name to the first accused to hatch conspiracy and to commit the crime, as a sequal thereof. The allegation against the 5^th accused is that he had arranged the car on the previous day of occurrence and accused Nos. 1 to 4 used the same to commit the crime. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Section 341,

¶42

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023 5

¶43

364, 394, 395, 120(B) and 212 of IPC. Thus very serious offence are alleged to be committed by the accused herein, except accused No.6.

¶44

While pressing for regular bail to the petitioners, the respective counsel submitted that the petitioners are innocent and their complicity in this matter is much less than that of the other accused. It is also pointed out that accused No.5 has been in custody from 26.12.2022 and accused Nos.8 and 9 have been in custody from 11.01.2023 onwards. It is submitted further that the entire money was recovered and the portion of the amount alleged to be received by accused Nos.8 and 9 also got recovered. Highlighting the progress of investigation and the stature of the petitioners as first time offenders, the learned counsel canvassed regular bail, with offer to co-operate with the investigation.

¶45

Whereas the learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed grant of bail, pointing out the seriousness of the

¶46

¶47

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶48

offences and the manner in which the same was planned and committed. He also submitted that since the investigation is on the midway, pre-mature release of the petitioners will stall the investigation.

¶49

In this matter, earlier, as per order in B.A.No.645/2023 dated 08.02.2023, this Court granted bail to the 6^th accused since it was found that the allegations against him was confined in the matter of giving shelter to accused Nos. 1 to 4 for hiding. On perusal of the available records, the prosecution is very well made out, prima facie and the crimes of this nature are serious. However, the petitioners have no criminal antecedents and the investigation requiring their custody is practically over. Therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners.

¶50

In the result, these bail applications stand allowed. The petitioners are enlarged on bail on conditions:

¶51

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶52

¶53

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

¶54

ii. The petitioners shall not intimidate the witnesses or tamper with evidence. They shall co-operate with the investigation and shall be available for trial.

¶55

iii. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed, apart from appearing before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 9 am and 10 am, for a period of two months.

¶56

iv. The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.

¶57

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶58

¶59

v. The petitioners shall not involve in any other offence during the currency of bail and any such event, if reported, or came to the notice of this court, the same shall be a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN

JUDGE

nkr

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶65

¶66

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 754/2023

¶67

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.341/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE JFCM I, PALAKKAD DATED 19.1.2023

¶68

BAIL APPL.Nos.754 & 1561 OF 2023

¶69

¶70

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1561/2023

¶71

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 546/2022 OF WALAYAR POLICE STATION Annexure II A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SESSIONS COURT PALAKKAD AS CRL.M.C NO.5173/2022 DATED 17.12.2023

Sumesh v. Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumesh v. Station House Officer

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

Mohammed Anas Vs State of Kerala

Soman @ Somashekharan Vs State of Kerala

Arun Gopal M.S Vs the State of Kerala

Bipin Sunny Vs State of Kerala

Ramachandran Vs State of Kerala

Velayudhan Achari Vs State of Kerala