High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2024-01-11Bail granted to petitioners Nos. 5, 8, and 11 w...

Satheesan P.P., Athul Kannan, and Arjun K.P. v. State of Kerala, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, and The Station House Officer, Pazhayangadi Police Station

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NO. 13 OF 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C. S. Dias, J.
Judgment Date: 2024-01-11
Court Decision / Holding: The Bail Application is allowed. The petitioners are to be released on bail on Rs.1,00,000/- bond with two solvent sureties, and subject to conditions (i) to (vii) enumerated in the order, including periodic appearances before the IO, non-inducement of witnesses, non-commission of offences, surrender of passports, and possible cancellation of bail for violations. The decision aligns with the court’s view that accused similarly situated to those already bailed may be granted bail with stringent safeguards to ensure cooperation and integrity of the investigation.
Final Disposition: Bail granted to petitioners Nos. 5, 8, and 11 with conditions; previously bail granted to some accused (1–3, 6) cited; ongoing conditions to ensure compliance and investigation

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Satheesan P.P.
Athul Kannan
Arjun K.P.

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor
The Station House Officer Pazhayangadi Police Station, Kannur District

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• M. Sasindran
• Satheeshan Alakkadan

Counsels for Respondents

• Public Prosecutor
• Smt. Seetha S., Senior Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a bail application (BAIL APPL. NO. 13 OF 2024) before the Kerala High Court by accused Nos.5, 8 and 11 in Crime No.1254/2023 of Pazhayangadi Police Station, Kannur. The fourteen accused are alleged to have formed an unlawful assembly on 20.11.2023 with deadly weapons, restrained Sudheesh Vellachal, and assaulted him with a helmet, plant pot and iron stick, causing injuries. The offences cited include sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 307 read with section 149 IPC. The petitioners were arrested on 28.12.2023. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued their total innocence and false implication, noting that accused 1–3 and 6 were already granted bail by Annexure AIV, and contending similarity of circumstances with those who were released. The Public Prosecutor opposed bail but conceded that others (1–3, 6) had been enlarged on bail. The court considered that the petitioners have remained in custody since 28.12.2023 and are similarly placed to the accused already bailed. It granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including a Rs.1,00,000 bond with two solvent sureties, regular appearances before the IO, non-inducement or tampering with witnesses, non-commission of offences, surrender of passports, and court power to cancel bail for violations. The order cites Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) to justify continuing investigation and enforceable bail safeguards. The petition was allowed on these terms.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, 2020 (1) KHC 663

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend they are innocent and falsely implicated; they point to the bail granted to accused 1–3 and 6 in Annexure AIV, asserting their similarity in circumstances and readiness to abide by stringent conditions, including reporting to the IO and abiding by all bail conditions; they seek release on bail pending trial, arguing that continued custody is unwarranted given the nature of the charges and the time already served.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor opposed bail on grounds of the serious nature of the offences and possible obstruction of justice, noting a violent incident involving a large unlawful assembly and the risk of witness intimidation. While conceding that others (1–3, 6) had already been granted bail, she argued for carefully calibrated conditions but ultimately relied on the established practice of granting bail in similar circumstances after balancing public interest and individual liberty.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	Cited to justify imposition of stringent bail conditions and continued investigation, endorsing the use of safeguarding measures while ensuring bail

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Satheesan P.P., Athul Kannan, and Arjun K.P. v. State of Kerala, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, and The Station House Officer, Pazhayangadi Police Station and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

1 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 11[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 21ST POUSHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 13 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1254/2023 OF Pazhyangadi Police Station, Kannur ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` 1SATHEESAN.P.P.,AGED 41 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN.K., PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE, NARIKKODE, KOTTILA.P.O., EZHOME AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001 2ATHUL KANNAN,AGED 22 YEARS S/O. SURESAN.V.V., ITTAMMAL HOUSE, KUNHIMANGALAM AMSOM, KOVVAPPURAM.P.O., THEKKUMBAD, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001 3ARJUN.K.P.,AGED 25 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN.C.A. CHENTHALA AREEKKAL VEEDU, ALAKKAD VAYANASHALA, ERIAM.P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001 BY ADVS. M.SASINDRAN SATHEESHAN ALAKKADAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PAZHAYANGADI POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670001 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.SEETHA.S, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 ## **C.S.DIAS,J** ## **======================** ## **Bail Application No. 13 of 2024** **-----------------------------------** **Dated this the 11[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 Nos.5,8 and 11 in crime No.1254/2023 of the Pazhayangadi Police Station, Kannur, registered against the accused (fourteen in number) alleging them to have committed the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147,148, 341, 323, 324 and 307 read with Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners were arrested on 28.12.2023. 3 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that: On 20.11.2023 at 17.30 hours, the accused 1 to 14 and twenty identifiable persons, with an intention to commit an offence formed an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons and wrongfully restrained one Sudheesh Vellachal with an intention to cause his death and beat him with a helmet, plant pot and iron stick and caused injuries to him. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Seetha.S, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 4 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. By Annexure-AIV order in BA No.10762/2023 dated 15.12.2023, this Court has enlarged the accused 1 to 3 and 6 on bail. The petitioners are similarly situated to the said accused. The petitioners are willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that 5 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 this Court has already enlarged accused 1 to 3 and 6 on bail by Annexure-AIV order. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record and taking into account the fact that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 28.12.2023 and this Court has already granted bail to the accused 1 to 3 and 6 by AnnexureAIV order and the petitioners are also similarly placed to the above accused, I am of the view that the petitioners are also entitled to be released on bail subject to stringent conditions. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them 6 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh 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: (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of three months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. And 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 7 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail; (iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passport, they shall file affidavits 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 8 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail 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]. sks/11.1.2024 sd/- **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** 9 Bail Application No. 13 of 2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 13/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` Annexure AIA TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1254 OF 2023 OF PAZHAYANGADI POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT ``` ``` Annexure AIIA TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 1253 OF 2023 OF PAZHAYANGADI POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT ``` ``` Annexure AIIIA TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.12.2023 IN C.M.P.NO.11773 OF 2023 IN CRIME NO. 1254 OF 2023 ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PAYYANNUR ``` ``` Annexure AIVA TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15-12-2023 IN B.A.NO.10762 OF 2023 ```