Ramar and others v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: A. Badharudeen
Judgment Date: 2023-05-31
Court Decision / Holding: The bail application is allowed in part. Anticipatory bail is denied for petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 8, while petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7 are granted anticipatory bail on conditions: surrender before the IO within ten days, the IO may interrogate on surrender, production before court on arrest, bond of Rs.30,000 with two solvent sureties, cooperation with investigation, available for interrogation as directed, no witness intimidation, and no commission of any offence during the currency of bail.
Final Disposition: Partial grant of relief: Accused Nos.1, 2, 8 denied anticipatory bail; Accused Nos.3 to 7 granted anticipatory bail with conditions.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

RAMAR
HARI
LAKSHMANAN
ARAVIND
IYYADURAI
MOHANAN
NISANTH
KASAMUTHU

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Adv. Latheesh Sebastian

Counsels for Respondents

• Sr. Public Prosecutor Sri. P. G. Manu

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Kerala High Court bail matter concerns eight petitioners/accused in Crime No.266/2023 of Munnar Police Station, Idukki, under Section 438 CrPC. The prosecution allege that on 14 March 2023 the accused formed an unlawful assembly with knowledge of its nature and attacked the de facto complainant and his cousin, using a knife and an iron rod; the de facto complainant sustained serious injuries including fractures, and one accused allegedly handed over the knife to another for the assault. The petitioners face multiple IPC charges: 143, 144, 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 326 read with 149. The defense contends that there is also Annexure 2 crime (Crime No.257/2023) with separate injuries, and that truth will emerge during evidence; they assert readiness to cooperate and seek anticipatory bail. The State opposes bail—arguing that the accused used weapons, that the knife was supplied by the 8th accused, and that arrest, custodial interrogation, and weapon recovery are necessary, citing the CT scan evidence of serious injuries. The court, after reviewing records, held that anticipatory bail should be dismissed for accused Nos.1, 2, and 8, while granting anticipatory bail to accused Nos.3 to 7 under strict conditions, including surrender within ten days, bonds of Rs.30,000 with two sureties, cooperation, and non-interference with witnesses. The decision reflects a partial relief disposition.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 438 of CrPCSections 143, 144, 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 326 read with Section 149 IPCSection 308 IPCSection 34 IPC

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended that since Annexure 1 crime (266/2023) and Annexure 2 crime (257/2023) involve injuries on both sides, the matter should be resolved in evidence and a bail should be granted to facilitate cooperation with the investigation; they asserted willingness to cooperate and that the truth will emerge through the proceedings.

Contentions of Respondents

The State argued that accused Nos.1 and 2 used weapons and that the knife supplied by the 8th accused indicates serious culpability; even for other accused, their participation in the unlawful assembly warrants custodial interrogation and weapon recovery; CT scan evidence of serious injuries strengthens the need for arrest and investigation.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN WEDNESDAY, THE 31[ST] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1945 ``` **`BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023`** CRIME NO.266/2023 OF MUNNAR POLICE STATION, IDUKKI ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:`** ``` 1RAMAR AGED 27 YEARS S/O IYYADURAI, LOWER DIVISION, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 2HARI AGED 22 YEARS S/O THENARESHU, LOWER DIVISION KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 3LAKSHMANAN AGED 27 YEARS S/O HARIKRISHNAN, LOWER DIVISION, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 4ARAVIND AGED 35 YEARS S/O THENARESHU, LOWER DIVISION, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 5IYYADURAI AGED 59 YEARS S/O RAJAYYA, LOWER DIVISION, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 6MOHANAN AGED 23 YEARS S/O IYYADURAI, LOWER DIVISION,KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 7NISANTH AGED 24 YEARS S/O KUMAR ASAITHAMPI, LOWER DIVISION, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 8KASAMUTHU AGED 59 YEARS S/O KASAMUTHU, KANNIMALA ESTATE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612 BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 2 ``` ``` BY SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P G MANU ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 3 ``` ## **ORDER** Dated this the 31[st] day of May, 2023. Anticipatory bail plea, at the instance of accused Nos.1 to 8 in Crime No266/2023 of Munnar Police Station, Idukki, is the crux of this petition, filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. I have perused the relevant documents. 4. The prosecution allegation is that, in between 5.30 p.m. and 5.45 p.m. on 14.3.2023, accused herein formed into unlawful assembly, with knowledge that they are all members of the said assembly, to cause grievous injuries to the de facto complainant and attacked him. The specific allegation is that, the 1[st] accused, who used a knife, handed over by the 8[th] accused, beat on the head of the de facto complainant. The further allegation is that, the 2[nd] accused beat the cousin of the de facto complainant, by using an iron rod and the same caused ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 4 ``` injuries on his left eye and the bone nearby the left eye. It is alleged that accused Nos.3 to 8 also assisted the other accused and thereby, all of them alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 326 r/w Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, in this matter, apart from registering Annexure 1 crime (Crime No.266/2023), Annexure 2 crime, Crime No.257/2023 also was registered, alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 308, 323, 294(b) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the 1[st] accused sustained very serious injuries in Annexure A2 crime. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, since case and counter involved, the truth of the matter is to be ascertained during evidence and as of now, both sides sustained injuries and therefore, the petitioners may be released on bail and they are ready to co-operate with the investigation. 6. Whereas, the learned Public Prosecutor would submit that, Accused Nos.1 and 2 alleged to have used ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 5 ``` weapons and the specific allegation is that, the knife used by the 1[st] accused to beat on the head of the de facto complainant, was given by the 8[th] accused. The learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that, eventhough the allegation against the other accused is not so specifically stated, they also, being members of unlawful assembly, assaulted the de facto complainant and thereby, caused injuries to the de facto complainant. The learned Public Prosecutor given heavy emphasis on the CT Scan report issued from Morning Star Scan, Morning Star Medical Centre, Idukki, showing multiple fractures and serious injuries to Sri.Rajan, the de facto complainant. Accordingly, it is pointed out that, arrest, custodial interrogation and recovery of weapons, at the instance of accused Nos.1, 2 and 8 of this crime, are necessary. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be released on anticipatory bail. 7. On perusal of the prosecution records, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners, registration of case and counter case could be gathered. In the counter case, serious offence is one under Section ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 6 ``` 308 of the Indian Penal Code. It is relevant to note that, in this matter, the de facto complainant sustained the following injuries: _Comminuted displaced fracture of left zygoma_ _Comminuted displaced fracture of lateral wall of left maxillary sinus with haemosinus_ _Mildly displaced fracture of lateral wall of left orbit_ _Diffuse emphysematous changes seen in left temporal scalp and infratemporal fossa_ It is discernible from the records that the knife was brought by the 8[th] accused and handed over to the 1[st] accused, to beat on the head of the de facto complainant. Similarly, the 2[nd] accused also used an iron rod to beat the de facto complainant’s cousin. In such case, the learned Public Prosecutor is right in arguing that arrest, custodial interrogation, recovery of weapons and identification of the same, at the instance of accused Nos.1, 2 and 8, are necessary, to accomplish meaningful investigation. Therefore, I am inclined to dismiss anticipatory bail plea, at the instance of petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 8, while allowing anticipatory bail to the other petitioners/accused, viz., petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7. ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 7 ``` In the result, the bail application is allowed in part. The bail plea, at the instance of petitioners/accused Nos.1, 2 and 8, stands dismissed. Anticipatory bail is granted to petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7, on the following conditions: - i. Petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7 shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question them. In the event of their arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce them before the jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself. - ii. On such production, the jurisdictional court shall release the petitioners/ accused Nos.3 to 7 on bail, on executing 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. - iii. Petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7 shall cooperate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 2526 OF 2023 8 ``` so. iv. Petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7, shall not intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation, in any manner. v. Petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 7 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** Bb