Vishnu Kumar v. State of Kerala

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 6[TH] DAY OF MAY 2022 / 16TH VAISAKHA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` CRIME NO.131/2022 OF Harippad Police Station, Alappuzha ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` VISHNU KUMAR AGED 29 YEARS S/O KUMAR, KATTUR KIZHAKKATHIL, PUTHANPALLY, THEKKUMURI, KUMARAPURAM, ALAPUZHA, PIN - 690548 BY ADVS. P.SREEKUMAR ASWIN KUMAR M J RENOY VINCENT ARUN ROY ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J** -------------------------------- ## B.A. No.3478 of 2022 ------------------------------Dated this the 6[th] day of May, 2022 ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Petitioner is the 4[th] accused in Crime No.131 of 2022 of the Harippad Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 341, 506, 294(b), 324, 307, 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was arrested on 17.02.2022. 3. The prosecution case is that on 16.02.2022 at 11.30 pm, accused Nos.1 to 7 with their common object to attack one Manoj formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with dangerous weapons. It is alleged that the 1[st] accused attacked the de-facto complainant with a knife and inflicted a deep wound on his left hand. The 2[nd] accused caught hold ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 3 ``` of the complainant’s friend Sarath and the 1[st] accused stabbed him on the left side of his stomach with a knife. The petitioner herein and the 2[nd] accused wrongfully restrained the de-facto complainant’s friends Kiran and Arun and slapped on their face and kicked them. It is also alleged that the 6[th] accused hit Kiran and Arun. The 9[th] accused slapped, kicked and abused complainant’s friend Rejilal. The 3[rd] accused restrained de-facto complainant’s friend Rajaneesh and hit on his head with a dangerous weapon and the 2[nd] accused kicked Rajaneesh. It is also alleged that the 1[st] accused kicked Rajaneesh on the back and thigh and the petitioner herein hit Rajaneesh on eyebrow with hands. There are other overt acts also alleged against the other accused. It is alleged that the 1[st] accused stabbed the de-facto complainant on his chest using a knife and when the de-facto complainant evaded the attack, the knife pierced the de-facto complainant’s left forearm. At that time, the deceased ran towards south and accused ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 4 ``` Nos.1 and 2 chased him. It is alleged that the 2[nd] accused caught hold of the deceased and the 1[st] accused stabbed on the left side of his stomach. The injured Sarath Chandran, while undergoing treatment at Medical College Hospital, Vandanam, succumbed to the injuries. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed offence. 4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if the entire allegations are accepted, there is no serious allegation against the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that even according to the prosecution, the petitioner has not used any weapon and there is no specific overt act alleged against the petitioner. It is also alleged that it was not a pre-planned attempt or attack, but the incident was occurred in a get-together function. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that as per Annexure A3 order, accused Nos.5, 7, 8 and 9 are already released on bail. The counsel for the petitioner ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 5 ``` submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 17.02.2022 onwards. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is actively involved in this case. The Public Prosecutor also submitted that the petitioner is accused in another crime also. The Public Prosecutor further submitted that the petitioner may not be released on bail. It is true that the allegations against the petitioner are very serious. But the petitioner is in custody from 17.02.2022. I carefully perused the prosecution case. There is no case to the prosecution that the petitioner used any dangerous weapon. Moreover, as per Annexure A3 order, accused Nos.5, 7, 8 and 9 were already released on bail. This Court in Annexure A3 order, which was dated 26.04.2022, stated that the investigation seems to have reached a fair stage. This Court also observed that the main allegation is against accused Nos.1 and 2. In the light of the same, there is no justification in denying bail to the petitioner. Therefore, this ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 6 ``` bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. 5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870),** after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same in as much as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. 6. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions: 1. Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 7 ``` the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. 2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 8 ``` 5. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10 am and 11 am on every Saturdays till final report is filed. 6. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of the above conditions. Sd/- ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE** np ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 3478 OF 2022 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3478/2022`** ``` PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES: Annexure A1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 17/02/2022 IN CRIME NO. 131/2022 OF HARIPAD POLICE STATION ALONG WITH THE FIS STATEMENT OF THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT Annexure A2THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/04/2022 BY SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA IN CMP. NO. 131 OF 2022. Annexure A3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/04/2022 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2557 OF 2022 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURES: NIL ```