Partly allowed

Unni @ Ajay B v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Feb 2023Bail Appl./953/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala granted anticipatory bail to the second and third petitioners while dismissing the application of the first petitioner. Bail for the latter was denied due to the necessity of custodial interrogation regarding the recovery of a weapon involved in the assault.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for Petitioners 2 and 3; Bail dismissed for Petitioner 1. Petitioners conditioned to surrender within ten days, execute bond of Rs. 30,000, and appear for interrogation.

Unni @ Ajay B Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1944

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶6

CRIME No.48 of 2023 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION

¶7

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3

¶8

1UNNI @ AJAY B
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O BABU, SUKUMARAN NILAYAM, KADAPPURAM,
KANHANGAD SOUTH, HOSDURG, KASARGOD DISTRICT,
PIN - 671315

¶9

2 NITHIN @ NIDINKUMAR AGED 27 YEARS

¶10

S/O MANOHARAN, OMKARAM, KADAPPURAM, KANHANGAD SOUTH,
HOSDURG, KASARGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671315

¶11

3ABHI @ ABHINAV RAJ K
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O RAJAN.K, KARTHIYAYANI NILAYAM ,47,KANANGAD BEACH
PUNCHAVI KADAPPURAM, HOSDURG KASARGOD, PIN - 671315
BY ADVS.
P.K.SUBHASH
K.REEHA KHADER
RAVEENA K.R.

¶12

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE:

¶13

STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
SMT.T. V. NEEMA(SR PP)

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Dated this the 23^rd day of February, 2023

¶19

This is an application for anticipatory bail filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by accused Nos. 1 to 3 in crime No. 48/2023 of Hosdurg police station.

¶20

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

¶21

I have perused the relevant documents forming part of the case diary along with the report of the investigating officer placed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶22

The prosecution case is that at about 2.30 hours on 10.01.2023 the accused herein restrained the defacto complainant near sea bay, Kanhangad, while he was travelling on his motorcycle bearing registration No.KL-60P-62. The specific allegation is that the first accused beat on the face of the defacto complainant by using a steel ring, wore at his hand and accused Nos.2 and 3 kicked the defacto complainant

¶23

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶24

3

¶25

using their hands. On this premise, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 341 323, 324, 326 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶26

Even though the learned counsel for the petitioners argued to substantiate the fact that the petitioners are innocent and they are liable to be released on anticipatory bail, the learned Public prosecutor opposed the same, highlighting the necessity of custodial interrogation in a case where there is nasal bone fracture sustained to the defacto complainant.

¶27

On perusal of the records along with the copy of wound certificate, the allegations are well made out, and defacto complainant sustained nasal bone fracture, as noted in the wound certificate. However, it is discernible from the records that allegation against use of weapon is against the first accused alone and there is no case for the prosecution that accused Nos. 2 and 3 have used any weapon to assault the defacto complaint. Therefore, investigation against

¶28

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶29

4

¶30

accused Nos.2 and 3 is possible even without custodial interrogation. Whereas, arrest, custodial interrogation and recovery of weapon at the instance of the first accused are necessary to effectuate proper investigation. Therefore, bail plea at the option of the first accused/first petitioner stands dismissed while allowing bail application at the option of second and third accused.

¶31

In the result, this petition stands allowed. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 (except the first petitioner) are released on anticipatory bail on conditions:

¶32

i. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioners and can recover the weapons, if any. In the event of arrest of the petitioners, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioners before the jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself.

¶33

ii. On such production, the jurisdictional court shall release the petitioners on bail, on executing

¶34

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶36

bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) each by themselves and by two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court.

¶37

iii. The petitioners shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so. Further they shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Wednesdays between 9 am and 10 am for four weeks from the date of their surrender.

¶38

iv. The petitioners shall not intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

¶39

v. The petitioners shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.

Sd/-

A. BADHARUDEEN

JUDGE

nkr

BAIL APPL. NO. 953 OF 2023

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 953/2023

¶47

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶48

Annexure AITRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.48/2023 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION,
KASARGODE DISTRICT

Unni @ Ajay B v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Unni @ Ajay B 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

Sarath Vs State of Kerala

Ikramul Haque Vs State of Kerala

John Joseph Mondero Vs State of Kerala

Priyanlal C.P. @ Chinjilu Vs State of Kerala

Sajin Vs State of Kerala

Balaodra Bonju Babu Vs State of Kerala