Vishnu @ Pattaru Vishnu v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON** **WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942** **Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021** **CRIME NO.1876/2020 OF Kollam East Police Station, Kollam** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **VISHNU @ PATTARU VISHNU AGED 29 YEARS PARIPPALLY PADINAJATTHIL VEETTIL, ULIYAKOVIL NAGAR -3, KOLLAM EAST 691012** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682031** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR R1 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 2 ## **ORDER** **Dated this the 10th day of February 2021** Application for regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 5[th] accused in Crime No.1876/2020 of Kollam East Police Station, Kollam, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 120B, 143, 144, 147, 148, 449, 294(b), 506(ii), 341, 323, 324 and 302 r/w Section 149 of the IPC. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 02.06.2020, the applicant and the other co-accused totaling five in number hatched a conspiracy at a place called Pallikkal junction to commit murder of a person named Udayakiran @ Kichu and in accordance with that conspiracy on the very same day at about 10 p.m, the applicant and the coaccused formed an unlawful assembly, committed 3 Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 riot, and in prosecution of the common object of the said unlawful assembly, trespassed into the property of the deceased, hurled abuses at him, intimidated him wrongfully restrained him, and the first accused armed with deadly weapon like a knife stabbed him to death. 3. The applicant states that he is innocent and the allegations are not true. There is no specific overt act attributed to him of having committed anything to cause death of the deceased. He was arrested on 03.06.2020 and has been in custody for about 250 days. The investigation is completed, the final report has already been filed on 27.08.2020 and the case is presently pending as SC No.1205/2020 on the files of the Second Additional Sessions Court, Kollam, awaiting trial. The applicant states that his further detention is not justified and he is entitled to be released on bail. Hence his bail application was rejected by 4 Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 the learned Sessions Judge and therefore he seeks indulgence of this Court. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor brings to the notice of this Court the antecedents of the applicant, which indicates that the applicant is a notorious criminal and a history sheeter, having five other criminal cases registered against him. The applicant has been constantly and regularly getting involved in different crimes right from the year 2013. Preventive action under KAAPA Act was also initiated against the applicant. The learned prosecutor states that the applicant is menace to the society at large. In case he is released on bail, there is every possibility of his intimidating or influencing the witnesses. He is also likely to get involved in offences of similar nature and likely to flee from justice. 5 Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 Considering the gravity of the offence committed by the applicant, it is submitted that he may not be granted bail. It is submitted that though the applicant has not inflicted any fatal injury on the deceased, he was on the part of the conspiracy and has been a member of the unlawful assembly which was formed as a result of the conspiracy to eliminate the deceased. The first accused very successfully accomplished the motive of the conspiracy that was hatched by all the accused including the applicant. Therefore, the bail application is vehemently opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. The nature of the offence is one of the basic consideration for the grant of bail - more heinous a crime, the greater is the chance of rejection of the bail, though however, dependent on the factual matrix of the matter. In _**Ram Govind**_ _**Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors [AIR 2002 SC**_ Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 6 _**1475]**_ relying on _**Prahalad Singh Bhati v. N.C.T, Delhi & Anr [2001 (4) SCC 280]** , the Apex Court has held thus:_ _“4. Apart from the above, certain other which may be attributed to be relevant considerations may also be noticed at this juncture though however, the same are only illustrative and not exhaustive neither there can be any. The consideration being:_ _(a) While granting bail the Court has to keep in mind not only the nature of the accusations, but the severity of the punishment, if the accusation entails a conviction and the nature of evidence in support of the accusations._ _(b) Reasonable apprehensions of the witnesses being tampered with or the apprehension of there being a threat for the complainant should also weigh with the Court in the matter of grant of bail._ _(c) While it is not accepted to have the entire evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt but there ought always to be prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge._ _(d) Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of_ Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 7 _there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail.”_ In the instant case, the applicant is a history sheeter with criminal records right from the year 2013. There are materials to show that a conspiracy was hatched to commit murder. Even though it was the first accused who had inflicted the fatal blow on the deceased, the applicant was very much part of the conspiracy. The applicant is a person against whom KAAPA has also been initiated. Under the circumstances, I find that the applicant is not entitled to bail considering the decisions of the Supreme Court. The applicant is definitely not entitled to any indulgence to be released on bail at the risk of exposing the witnesses to intimidation and threat. The application is disposed of with a direction to the learned Sessions Judge to proceed Bail Appl..No.1315 OF 2021 **==> picture [8 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** with the trial and dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. **Sd/-** **ASHOK MENON** **JUDGE** spk