UNNIKRISHNAN, VISHNU @ THYMBU, and JITHIN S v. STATE OF KERALA

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS`** ``` MONDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 30TH MAGHA, 1945 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 1210 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1321/2023 OF KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ``` ## **`PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 2 TO 4:`** ``` 1UNNIKRISHNAN AGED 25 YEARS S/O SATHEESAN, ASWATHI BHAVANAM, ERUVA P.O., PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690572 ``` ``` 2VISHNU @ THYMBU AGED 26 YEARS S/O KRISHNADAS, KRISHNALAYAM, ERUVA P.O., PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690572 ``` ``` 3JITHIN S AGED 22 YEARS S/O SHAJI, CHENATHU VADAKATHIL, ERUVA WEST, KAREELAKULANGARA P.O., PATHIYOOR VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690572 ``` ``` BY ADVS. GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN VAISHNAV DATH S. SRIRAM R.B. JINCE T. THOMAS ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031` - `2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA - 690 502.` ``` KAYAMKULAM POLICE STATION, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 690502 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SR PP SRI C S HRITHWIK ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** ``` 3 ``` ## **Dated this the 19[th] day of February, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 2 to 4 in Crime No.1321/2023 of the Kayamkulam Police Station, Alappuzha, registered against the accused (four accused and other identifiable persons) for allegedly committing the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 451 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners were arrested on 29.01.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case, is that; on 16.12.2023 at around 00.15 hours, the accused in prosecution of their common intention formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the de facto complainant/injured with iron rods and hammer and he sustained serious injuries. The accused hit the injured on different parts of **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** ``` 4 ``` his body and, thus committed the above offences. 3. Heard Sri. Gokul D. Sudhakaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the crime. Section 308 of the IPC has been deliberately incorporated to deny bail to the petitioners. A reading of Annexure I FIR would establish the falsity in the crime. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 29.1.2024, which is more than 20 days. The investigation in the crime is practically complete. The recovery has been effected. The wound certificate of the injured would substantiate that the injured had not suffered any serious injury as alleged in Annexure I FIR. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** ``` 5 ``` application. He contended that the injured had suffered injuries on different parts of his body. He made available the Accident Register-cum-Wound Certificate of the injured dated 16.12.2023 issued by the Taluk Hospital, Kayamkulam. He submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 6. The gist of the prosecution case is that the accused 1 to 4 had in prosecution of their common intention formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the injured with iron rods and hammer, and he sustained grievous injuries. On a perusal of the Accident Registercum Wound Certificate of the injured, prima facie it is seen that the injured had suffered abrasions and contusions on different parts of his body. Therefore, the injury suffered by the injured is not serious in nature as alleged in Annexure I FIR. In addition to the same, the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 29.1.2024, ``` 6 ``` ## **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** that the investigation in the case so far the petitioners is concerned, is practically complete and recovery has been effected. 7. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the materials placed on record, the rival submissions made across the Bar, especially after verifying the Accident Register cum Wound Certificate of the injured, I am of the definite view that the petitioners’ further detention is not necessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application. 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. ``` 7 ``` ## **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** and 11 a.m for a period of one month 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 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 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 ``` 8 ``` ## **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** of execution of the bond; (v) The petitioners shall furnish their present address and permanent address, and mobile phone number to the court below and the Investigating Officer; (vi) 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. (vii) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. (viii) 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 ``` 9 ``` ## **B.A. No.1210 of 2024** 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/19/2/2024