Kerala High Court
Ajayan @ Ajayan Pillai vs State Of Kerala on 29 January, 2019
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 9TH MAGHA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 142 of 2019
CRIME NO.1726/2018 OF POOYAPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
AJAYAN @ AJAYAN PILLAI,
AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O. KRISHNA PILLAI, AJAYA VILASAM, KAYILA,
VELIYAM, POOYAPPALLY, KOLLAM - 691537.
BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
KOCHI - 682031.
2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
POOYAPPALLY POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691537.
BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. AMJAD ALI
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2019,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BA:142/2019 2
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
2. The applicant herein is the 1 st accused in Crime No.1726 of 2018 registered at the Pooyappally Police Station under Sections 294(b), 452, 323, 326, 354, 427 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The de facto complainant is a lady. She has two daughters. The sons of the applicant herein, who are accused Nos.2 and 3 in the instant crime, are alleged to have spread certain scandalous statements against the daughter of the de facto complainant. This was questioned by the lady. Due to this enmity, the accused Nos.2 and 3 trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and assaulted her and snatched her ornaments. When the daughter of the de facto complainant intervened, she was also assaulted. When the de facto complainant ran out of the house, the applicant herein who was waiting outside, dashed her down with his bike and rode his bike over her leg causing a fracture.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted BA:142/2019 3 that at the instance of the applicant herein, Crime No.727 of 2018 has been registered inter alia under Sections 323 and 354 of the IPC. He would contend that even according to the prosecution, the applicant did not enter the house. It was accused Nos.2 and 3, who had entered the house and committed the acts. He would further contend that the applicant had suffered a serious wound on the occipital region of his head and had to undergo treatment.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has seriously opposed the prayer.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced. It appears from the records that the applicant herein had suffered injuries in an incident which took place immediately after registration of the instant crime. However, the records reveal that the sons of the applicant had trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and had committed the assault. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, the severity of the injuries inflicted, the materials in support thereof and attendant facts, it does not appear that this Court will be justified in arming the applicant with an order of pre-arrest bail. However, I am of the view that necessary direction can be issued to enable the BA:142/2019 4 applicant to co-operate with the investigation.
7. I direct the applicant to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the court having jurisdiction and seek regular bail. If an application for bail is filed, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed expeditiously and on its merits.
This application is dismissed.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE KRJ //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE