YUSRI.N, ALI AKBAR, NIYAS P., SAJEER A.P. v. STATE OF KERALA and EDAVANNA POLICE STATION

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: A. BADHARUDEEN
Judgment Date: 2023-02-17
Court Decision / Holding: Anticipatory bail pleas of accused Nos.1 and 3 are dismissed. Anticipatory bail pleas of accused Nos.2 and 4 are allowed, subject to conditions: (i) surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days, (ii) bond of Rs.30,000 with two solvent sureties for each, (iii) cooperation with investigation and availability for interrogation, (iv) no intimidation or interference with witnesses, (v) no commission of offences during the currency of bail.
Final Disposition: Partial grant of relief: bail denied for 1st and 3rd accused; anticipatory bail granted for 2nd and 4th accused with conditions.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

YUSRI.N
ALI AKBAR
NIYAS P.
SAJEER A.P.

Respondents

STATE OF KERALA
STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAVANNA POLICE STATION

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• K. RAKESH

Counsels for Respondents

• P.G. MANU

Case Synopsis & Summary

This bail application, under Section 438 CrPC, concerns four accused in Crime No.708/2022 of Edavanna Police Station, Malappuram, alleging offences under sections 341, 323, 324, 308, 427 and 506(ii) read with 34 IPC. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in Bail Application No.1096 of 2023 before the Kerala High Court. The prosecution alleges that on the night of 23 December 2022, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant over political animosity related to a Panchayat election, with accused 1 allegedly beating the complainant on the head with an iron rod, causing injuries; others are said to have assaulted with their hands and damaged cars, causing an estimated loss of Rs.10,000. The defense submitted that the 3rd accused has already been arrested, rendering pre-arrest bail for him infructuous, and that there is a counter case against the complainant and others which is still under investigation. It was submitted that accused Nos.2 and 4 did not use weapons. The Public Prosecutor argued that arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary to recover the iron rod and to facilitate a meaningful investigation. After considering the case diary and medical wound certificate, the court dismissed the bail for the 1st and 3rd accused and granted anticipatory bail to accused Nos.2 and 4 with conditions.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal ProcedureSections 341, 323, 324, 308, 427, 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners’ counsel submitted that accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 seek anticipatory bail while accused No.3 has already been arrested, making pre-arrest bail for him infructuous. They argued there is a counter case against the defacto complainant and others which is under investigation, and that accused Nos.2 and 4 did not use any weapon; the investigation requires that the 3rd accused’s arrest or pre-arrest bail not be obstructive. They urged grant of anticipatory bail to accused Nos.2 and 4 with appropriate conditions, emphasizing cooperation with the investigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor contended that arrest and custodial interrogation of the petitioners are necessary to recover the iron rod and to accomplish meaningful investigation. The case diary discloses a specific overt act by the 1st accused and attempts by the accused to interfere with or threaten witnesses; he also used a weapon. Since there is an ongoing investigation and potential risk of tampering, the prosecution argued against granting anticipatory bail to the 1st and 3rd accused, while supporting bail for accused Nos.2 and 4 with suitable conditions to ensure cooperation.

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** **FRIDAY, THE 17[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023/28TH MAGHA, 1944** **BAIL APPL. NO.1096 OF 2023** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMC 1449/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, MANJERI CRIME NO.708/2022 OF THE EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** 1 YUSRI.N, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.USMAN MADANI, NEEROLPAN HOUSE, EDAVANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676541. 2 ALI AKBAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED, SOOTHRAPPADAN HOUSE, EAST CHATHALLOOR, CHATHALLOOR P.O., PERAKAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676541. 3 NIYAS P., AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED, PALANADAN HOUSE, EAST CHATHALLOOR, CHATHALLOOR P.O., PERAKAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676541. 4 SAJEER A.P., AGED 33 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED, ALIKKAPARAMBAN HOUSE, OTHAYI, PERAKAMANNA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676541. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH ## **RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:** 1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN – 682031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAVANNA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676541. BY ADV. SRI. P.G.MANU, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** 2 ## **O R D E R** ## **Dated, this the 17[th] February, 2023** This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, by the petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.708/2022 of Edavanna Police Station, Malappuram, where they alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 308, 427, 506(ii) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and the petitioners seek anticipatory bail. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. Perused the relevant documents placed by the learned Public Prosecutor form part of the Case Diary and the report of the Investigating Officer. 4. The prosecution allegation is that at about 21:30 hrs. on 23.12.2022, accused Nos.1 to 4 assaulted the defacto complainant at 3 ## **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** Puliyila Parammal of Perakamanna Amsom, due to animosity arose out an occurrence, whereby the accused persons worked against the wife of the 1[st] accused in Panchayat election. A specific allegation is that the 1[st] accused uttered to kill the defacto complainant and, accordingly, the 1[st] accused beat on the head of the defacto complainant by using an iron rod. Although he evaded, he sustained injuries. The allegation against the other accused is that they had beaten the defacto complainant by using their hands and also destructed their cars and thereby, caused a loss of Rs.10,000/-. This is the premise on which the prosecution alleges commission of the above offences. 5. While pressing anticipatory bail to accused Nos.1, 2 and 4, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the 3[rd] accused had already arrested. Therefore, prearrest bail plea at his instance has become infructuous. ## **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** 4 6. Regarding the complicity of the other accused, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a counter case also was registered alleging the same offences against the defacto complainant and other accused, and the same also is on investigation. 7. Whereas, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that arrest and custodial interrogation of the petitioners are necessary in order to recover the iron rod and to accomplish meaningful investigation. 8. On perusal of the case diary, even though there is general allegation that accused Nos.1 to 4 assaulted the defacto complainant and destroyed the cars and, thereby, caused loss of Rs.10,000/-. Specific overt act against the 1[st] accused/1[st] petitioner is that he had used an iron rod to beat the defacto complainant on his head. There is no allegation that other accused used any weapon. 9. The wound certificate pertains to ## **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** **==> picture [7 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** Sahal Rahman, prepared on the date of occurrence, the following injuries are noted: _1. Lacerated wound 2x1x0.5 cm at right thumb. 2. Lacerated wound 2x2 cm at vertex region of scalp._ _3. Tenderness at right knee. 4. Tenderness at left elbow. 5. Linear abrasion 10x0.5 cm at left shoulder._ 10. On perusal of the available materials, the allegation of the prosecution as to commission of the offences by the accused could be well established. In such a case, arrest, custodial interrogation and recovery of iron rod at the instance of the 1[st] accused/1[st] petitioner, are necessary to accomplish meaningful investigation. Therefore, grant of pre-arrest bail to the 1[st] accused cannot be considered. Therefore, his application stands dismissed. 11. Whereas, accused Nos.2 and 4 are liable **==> picture [429 x 14] intentionally omitted <==** **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** 6 direction to subject themselves for interrogation, since the prosecution has no allegation that they had used any weapon. 12. In the result, anticipatory bail plea at the instance of the 1[st] accused and 3[rd] accused stands dismissed for the reasons discussed herein above. Consequently, anticipatory bail plea at the instance of accused Nos.2 and 4, is allowed and accused Nos.2 and 4 can be enlarged on bail on the following conditions: i. Accused Nos.2 and 4/petitioners 2 and 4 shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioner. In the event of their arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioners 2 and 4 before the jurisdictional court on the date of arrest itself. ii. On such production, the 7 ## **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** jurisdictional court shall release them on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/(Rupees thirty thousand only) by themselves and by two solvent sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court. iii. Petitioners 2 and 4 shall cooperate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so. iv. Petitioners 2 and 4 shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner. v. Petitioners 2 and 4 shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted. Sd/- ## **A.BADHARUDEEN, JUDGE.** ww **B.A. No.1096 of 2023** 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1096/2023** PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER - THE FATHER-IN-LAW OF THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDAVANNA DATED, 28-62022. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM EDAVANNA POLICE STATION DATED 30-6-2022. ANNEXURE C A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT MADE BY THE WIFE OF THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 1-62022. ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM EDAVANNA POLICE STATION DATED 1-6-2022. ANNEXURE E FREE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.C. NO.1449/2022 FILED BEFORE THE COURT OF SESSION, MANJERI DIVISION DATED, 17-12023.