SREEHARI v. STATE OF KERALA

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: A. Badharudeen
Judgment Date: 2023-02-16
Court Decision / Holding: This petition stands allowed; the petitioner is released on bail on the following conditions: i. Bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties; ii. He shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence and shall cooperate with the investigation and be available for trial; iii. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as directed; iv. He shall not induce or threaten any person acquainted with the facts; v. He shall not involve in any other offence during the currency of bail and any such event may cancel the bail.
Final Disposition: Bail granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

SREEHARI AGED 25 YEARS S/O HARIKUMARAN NAIR

Respondents

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• K.R. Vinod
• M.S. LETHA NABIL KHADER
• CHITHRA C. EDADAN

Counsels for Respondents

• Smt T V Neema, Sr. Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

Sreehari, the second accused in Crime No.1957 of 2022 at Sasthamcotta Police Station, Kollam, sought regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. On the night of 29 December 2022, the accused and the first offender allegedly restrained the defacto complainant with common intention arising from prior animosity, and the second accused beat and pushed him while the first accused struck the head and face with a freewheel, causing serious injuries to two persons who survived. The offences charged include sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 341 and 307 read with 34 IPC. The defense contends that the overt act attributed to the petitioner involved only a hand attack and his role is comparatively lesser than that of the first accused; the investigation has progressed and he has no criminal antecedents; he has already undergone custody for about 22 days and should be released on bail subject to standard conditions. The Public Prosecutor counters that the incident stemmed from a petrol pump dispute; the second accused allegedly initiated the overt acts in concert with the first accused; hence his complicity is on par with the other accused. After examining the case diary and the progress of investigation, the court finds that the facts justify granting bail with conditions. The petition is allowed on strict conditions: bond Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties, no witness intimidation, cooperation with investigation, appearance as directed, and prohibition from committing any offence during bail.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of CrPCIPC sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 341 and 307 read with 34

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation is at a progressed stage and the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. He has been in custody since 23 January 2023, about 22 days, and is ready to cooperate with the inquiry. The overt act attributed to the petitioner is only a hand attack and his complicity is lesser than that of the first accused. The grant of anticipatory bail earlier and surrender to the jurisdictional Magistrate evidenced the court's intention to consider bail on the same day. Deterring him from trial will not serve justice. The petitioner requests bail on standard conditions to ensure presence during trial and cooperation with the investigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor argued that the offense involved serious injuries to two persons and that the motive arises from a petrol pump dispute, indicating the second accused initiated the overt acts in concert with the first accused. Although no weapon was used, the gravity of injuries shows risk of re-offending. While investigation is progressing, bail would undermine the prosecution and enable witness tampering. If bail is granted, it should be subject to stringent conditions and monitoring, to secure the investigation and ensure attendance at trial.

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 THURSDAY, THE 16[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 27TH MAGHA,** ## **1944** ## **BAIL APPL. NO. 1087 OF 2023** **CRIME NO.1957 OF 2022 OF SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM** **PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 :** **SREEHARI AGED 25 YEARS S/O. HARIKUMARAN NAIR, ULLADAPALLY HOUSE, KUNNATHOOR P.O., WEST POKUNNATHOOR, PIN- 690 540.** **BY ADVS. K.R.VINOD M.S.LETHA NABIL KHADER CHITHRA C.EDADAN** **RESPONDENT :** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031** **BY SMT T V NEEMA, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD 09.02.2023, THE COURT ON 16.02.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..2.. ## **A.BADHARUDEEN, J.** **-------------------------------------------------------B.A.No.1087 of 2023 -------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 16[th] day of February, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the petitioner who is the second accused in Crime No.1957 of 2022 of Sasthamcotta Police Station, Kollam. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. I have perused the Case Diary materials produced by the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. The prosecution case is that, at 9.30 p.m. on 29.12.2022, accused Nos.1 and 2 wrongfully B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..3.. restrained the defacto complainant with intention to do away him, after sharing common intention due to previous animosity. Further allegation is that the second accused beat and pushed down the defacto complainant and at this juncture, the first accused beat on the head and face of the defacto complainant by using a freewheel and the same caused very serious injuries to the defacto complainant, though he survived. On this premise, prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 341 and 307 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. While pursuing regular bail to the petitioner, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, as per order in B.A.No.192 of 2023 dated 18.01.2023, when anticipatory bail was moved by this Court, this Court directed to surrender the B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..4.. petitioner before the jurisdictional Magistrate with direction to consider his bail application on the same day. In obedience to the said direction, when the petitioner surrendered and filed bail application, the same was dismissed by the learned Magistrate, while allowing the custody application moved by the prosecution. Accordingly, the petitioner was given custody for a period of four days. He also would submit that the overt act alleged against the second accused/the petitioner herein is only attack against the respondent by using his hand, his complicity is lesser than that of the first accused. Since the investigation has achieved substantial progress, the petitioner, who has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody from 23.01.2023, is liable to be released on bail. 6. While opposing bail, the learned Public B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..5.. Prosecutor would submit that eventhough there is no allegation that the petitioner herein used any weapon to attack the defacto complainant, the motive behind the crime is the dispute in between the defacto complainant and the petitioner at Petrol Pump, 7[th] mile, just before the occurrence. Thus, second accused is the person who initiated the overt acts in association with the first accused and therefore, his complicity is on par with the first accused. Highlighting the premature stage of investigation, the learned Public Prosecutor zealously opposed bail. 7. On perusal of the case diary, submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor appears to be convincing. It is to be noted that, as a result of attack at the instance of the petitioner and the first accused, two persons sustained injuries. The injured are B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..6.. Abhimanyu and Neeraj. In the wound certificate of Abhimanyu, three injuries noted. Similarly, in the wound certificate of Neeraj also, three injuries noted. Thus, the prosecution case is well made out and the complicity of the petitioner cannot be read in isolation from that of the first accused. 8. However, having noticed the progress of investigation and the custody of the petitioner, who has no criminal antecedents, for the last 22 days, he can be enlarged on bail on conditions. Therefore, this petition stands allowed and he is released on bail on the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court concerned. B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..7.. ii. The petitioner shall not intimidate the witnesses or tamper with evidence. He shall co-operate with the investigation and shall be available for trial. iii. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. iv. The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. v. The petitioner shall not involve in any other offence during the currency of bail and any such event, if reported or came to the notice of this court, the same shall be a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted. Sd/- ## **A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE** rkj B.A.No.1087 of 2023 ..8.. ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1087/2023** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **ANNEXURE A1 THE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 1957/2022 OF SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM RURAL** **ANNEXURE A2 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN B.A.NO.192 OF 2023 DATED 18.01.2023 ANNEXURE A3 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P.NO.606/2023 DATED 01.02.2023 OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS (TEMPORARY) SASTHAMCOTTA**