Rajesh and others v. State of Kerala

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 4TH MAGHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 420 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1074/2023 OF MULANTHURUTHY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMC 53/2024 OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, ERNAKULAM CMP 1/2024 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED`** ``` 1RAJESH AGED 40 YEARS S/O RAVEENDRAN, PARAMALAYIL HOUSE, VETTIKKAL KARA, MULANTHURUTHY VILLAGE & P.O, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682314 ``` ``` 2DASARADHAN AGED 51 YEARS S/O RAVEENDRAN PARAMALAYIL HOUSE, VETTIKKAL KARA, MULANTHURUTHY VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682314 ``` ``` 3ANEESH AGED 30 YEARS S/O DASARADHAN , PARAMALAYIL HOUSE, VETTIKKAL KARA, MULANTHURUTHY VILLAGE, KANAYANNOOR TALUK. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682314 ``` ``` BY ADV JOHN T.PAUL ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** ``` 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER MULANTHURUTHY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL DISTRICT, MULANTHURUTHY P.O, ERNAKULAM DIST., PIN - 682314 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI C S HRITHWIK ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 24.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. No.420 of 2024** ``` 3 ``` ## **Dated this the 24[th] day of January, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 to 3 in Crime No.1074/2023 of the Mulanthuruthy Police Station, Ernakulam, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 341, 294 (b), 506 (i) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners 1 and 3 were arrested on 25.12.2023. Although the second petitioner was arrested on 25.12.2023, since he was undergoing treatment, he was remanded to judicial custody only on 1.1.2024. 2. The concise case of the prosecution is that; around 9.30 p.m., on 25.12.2023, the accused in prosecution of their common intention, attempted to commit murder of the husband of the de facto complainant and his brother by using a chopper. The first ``` 4 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** accused inflicted a cut injury on the head, back and legs of the brother of the de facto complainant’s husband and when the de facto complainant’s husband attempted to prevent the accused from causing the injuries, he also sustained a cut injury on his face. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard Sri. John T.Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusation levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. Section 307 of IPC has been deliberately added in order to deny bail to the petitioners. The petitioners were arrested on 25.12.2023, which is now one month. The investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been ``` 5 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** effected. The petitioners’ further detention is unnecessary. The petitioners may be enlarged on bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He contended that the investigation is still in progress. Nonetheless, he made available the Accident Register-cum- Wound Certificate of one of the injured, named Ratheesh dated 25.12.2023. He also submitted that first accused has criminal antecedents as he is involved in five cases for committing minor offences. 6. On an anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly after going through the Accident Register- cum – Wound Certificate of the person named, Ratheesh, which shows that the injured suffered only a laceration on the left side of his cheek and that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 25.12.2023, that the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected, I am of the definite view that the petitioners’ continued ``` 6 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application, but subject to stringent conditions. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each 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: (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any ``` 7 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; - (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; - (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; (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. - (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail ``` 8 ``` ## **B.A. No.420 of 2024** conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. (vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the 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].** SD/- **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** rmm/24/1/2024