Allowed

Ganesh Kumar K, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Feb 2024Bail Appl./270/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by four accused in an unlawful assembly and weapon assault case; wound certificates showed no grievous injuries, custody exceeded 42 days and recovery was effected, so the court granted bail on a bond with stringent conditions including weekly appearance before the Investigating Officer.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on Rs.50,000 bond with two solvent sureties each, subject to conditions including weekly appearance before the Investigating Officer and no witness tampering.

Ganesh Kumar K, Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 18TH MAGHA, 1945

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶6

CRIME NO.1788/2023 OF Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 GANESH KUMAR K,AGED 46 YEARS, S/O KOCHAN, MALLAMKUDAM HOUSE, MATHUR P.O, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678571

¶9

2 DINESH A,AGED 33 YEARS, S/O ARUCHAMI, ANIKIRAMKAD HOUSE,THACHANKAD, MATHUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678571

¶10

3 SUNIL KUMAR P,AGED 43 YEARS, S/O PRABHAKARAN, AKKARAKAVIL HOUSE, MATHUR, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678571

¶11

4 SIJIL S,AGED 27 YEARS, S/O SIVAN, NEDUMPARAMBU HOUSE, KODUNTHIRAPULLY, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678004

¶12

BY ADV V.A.VINOD

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031

¶15

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001

¶16

OTHER PRESENT:

¶17

SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK

¶18

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 to 4 in Crime No.1788/2023 of the Palakkad Town South Police Station, Palakkad, registered against the accused (six in number) for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 148, 341, 324, 308, 506, 427 r/w Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners were arrested on 25.12.2023.

¶23

The gist of the prosecution case is that: on

¶24

25.12.2023 at around 10.30 hours, the accused 1 to 6 in prosecution of their common intention formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to hurt the defacto complainant with deadly weapons. The 1^st accused cut on the defacto complainant's back with a sword. Since the defacto complainant evaded the cut, he did not lose his life. The 2^nd accused dragged the defacto complainant

¶25

¶26

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶27

along the road and the accused 3 to 6 threatened him.

¶28

However, the defacto complainant sustained a cut injury on his hand. Thereafter, the accused also injured the persons along with the defacto complainant. They also smashed the glass of the defacto complainant's car and he suffered a loss of Rs.50,000/-. Thus, the accused have

¶29

committed the above offences.

¶30

Heard; Sri.V.A.Vinod, the learned counsel

¶31

appearing for the petitioners and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the

¶32

learned Public Prosecutor.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations leveled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 25.12.2023, which is more than 42 days. The investigation in the case is practically complete. The

¶34

¶35

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶36

recovery has been effected. The petitioners' further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the petitioners may be released on bail.

¶37

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He contended that the petitioners 1 and 2 are persons with criminal antecedents. The 1^st petitioner is an accused in 12 criminal cases and the 2^nd petitioner is an accused in three criminal cases. The investigation in the present case is in progress. The accused 5 and 6 are absconding. If the petitioners are let off on bail, there is every likelihood of them intimidating the witnesses and tampering with the evidence. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

¶38

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted the contention that the 1^st accused has antecedents is not correct. All the crimes registered

¶39

¶40

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶41

against the 1^st petitioner are prior to the year 2016. In most of the cases, the 1^st petitioner has already been acquitted. Likewise in the three cases registered against the 2^nd petitioner, in two cases he has been acquitted. He submitted that even going by the wound certificates of the injured, no serious injuries have been caused to them.

¶42

Hence, the application may be allowed.

¶43

The gist of the prosecution case is that on 25.12.2023, the accused had caused injuries to the defacto complainant and his friends. It is alleged that if the defacto complainant had not evaded the attack of the 1^st accused, it would have resulted in his death.

¶44

I have perused the accident register cum wound certificate of the defacto complainant and two other injured dated 27.12.2023 issued by the Palakkad District Co-operative and Research Centre, Palakkad. A reading of

¶45

¶46

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶47

the said certificates would reveal that the defacto complainant and other two injured have not suffered grievous injuries. Indisputably, the petitioners have been in judicial custody since the last 42 days.

¶48

On an anxious consideration of the facts, materials

¶49

placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and particularly after going through the accident register cum wound certificates of the three injured, that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the last 42 days, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and that the recovery has been effected, I am of the definite view that the petitioners' continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail, but subject to stringent conditions.

¶50

In the result, the application is allowed, by directing

¶51

¶52

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶53

the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions:

¶54

(i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of one month or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶55

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

¶56

¶57

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶58

(iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while

¶59

they are on bail;

¶60

(iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passport, they shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond;

¶61

(v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (vii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.

¶62

(viii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the

¶63

¶64

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶65

matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663].

¶66

sd/C.S.DIAS JUDGE

¶67

rkc/07.02.24

¶68

BAIL APPL. NO. 270 OF 2024

¶69

¶70

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 270/2024

¶71

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶72

Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO 1788/2023 OF TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P NO 6965/2023 DATED 05.01.2024

Ganesh Kumar K, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Kumar K, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omar Abdul Vahab Vs State of Kerala

Omar Abdul Vahab Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Niyas Vs State of Kerala

Noorjahan, Vs State of Kerala

Subhash.C, Vs State of Kerala

Biju George, Vs State of Kerala