Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Bijoy Cleetus vs State Of Kerala Represeted By Public ... on 4 August, 2020

Author: Ashok Menon

Bench: Ashok Menon

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

 TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942

                  Bail Appl..No.4482 OF 2020

    CRIME NO.791/2020 OF Kanjiramkulam Police Station,
                    Thiruvananthapuram


PETITIONER:

              BIJOY CLEETUS
              AGED 24 YEARS, S/O CLEETUS, RESIDING AT
              VALIYATHOPPU, THEKKEKARA, KOCHUTHURA,
              PUTHIYATHURA P.O,
              695526

              BY ADV. SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ

RESPONDENT:

              STATE OF KERALA REPRESETED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
              HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
              682031

              SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP


     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.08.2020, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3672/2020, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Bail Appl..Nos.4482 OF 2020 & 3672 OF 2020

                               2



         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

 TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1942

                  Bail Appl..No.3672 OF 2020

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 832/2020 DATED 12-06-
   2020 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,TRIVANDRUM

    CRIME NO.791/2020 OF Kanjiramkulam Police Station,
                    Thiruvananthapuram


PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:

              ANEESH VARGHESE
              AGED 32 YEARS
              S/O. VARGHESE, RESIDING AT EMMANATHOTTAM,
              KOCHUTHURA, PUTHIYATHURA P.O,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695 526

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ
              SHRI.SUMEEN S.

RESPONDENT:

              STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
              HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 031

              SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN SR PP


     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.08.2020, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4482/2020, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Bail Appl..Nos.4482 OF 2020 & 3672 OF 2020

                                 3

                        COMMON ORDER

[ Bail Appl..4482/2020, Bail Appl..3672/2020 ] Dated this the 4th day of August 2020 These are applications filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail.

2. The applicant in BA No.3672/2020 is the 1 st accused and the applicant in BA No.4482/2020 is the 2nd accused in Crime No.791/2020 of Kanjiramkulam Police Station, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 326 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

3. The prosecution case is that, the accused were irked by the defacto complainant who had rebuked the 2nd accused for not keeping his pet dog under leash. Infuriated, the 2nd accused in furtherance of common intention, on 04.05.2020 at about 8.15 a.m, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant while he was coming in his bicycle, by using his auto rickshaw bearing Registration Bail Appl..Nos.4482 OF 2020 & 3672 OF 2020 4 No.KL-22-C-4691, and thereafter, the 2nd accused hit him with a bunch of keys, as a result of which, he sustained a fracture of the nasal bond and the other accused fisted him all over the body and caused other injuries too.

4. The applicants state that they are innocent, and the allegations are false and frivolous. Moreover, it is also stated that Section 326 of IPC will not be attracted because it was on sudden provocation that the applicants had allegedly attacked the defacto complainant and therefore, at the most only Section 335 of the IPC would be attracted. The applicants seek pre arrest bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. I am not going to venture into a prolix discussion regarding the applicability of Section 326 or 335 of the IPC and leave it for the trial Bail Appl..Nos.4482 OF 2020 & 3672 OF 2020 5 court to decide at the time of framing of charge. The facts remain that the applicants are not having any criminal antecedents. It is also pertinent to note that the injury was not inflicted with any dangerous or deadly weapon but by a bunch of keys. The only fracture injury was sustained to the nasal bone, and there were other minor injuries all over the body. I find no reason to hold that the accused may abscond, or that they would not co-operate with the investigation. Therefore, they are entitle to pre-arrest bail so as long as they are willing to co-operate with the investigation.

7. In the result, the bail applications are allowed and the applicants are directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. After interrogation and recovery, in the event of their being arrested, they shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Bail Appl..Nos.4482 OF 2020 & 3672 OF 2020 6 Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and on the following conditions;

i. They shall not tamper with evidence, influence or intimidate witnesses.

ii. They shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for. iii. They shall not get involved in similar offences during the bail period.

In the event of violating the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional Court.

Sd/-

ASHOK MENON JUDGE SPK