Soopi vs State Of Kerala

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 242 Ker
Judgement Date : 5 January, 2021

Kerala High Court
Soopi vs State Of Kerala on 5 January, 2021
                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

    TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 15TH POUSHA, 1942

                       Bail Appl..No.9053 OF 2020

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 2136/2020 DATED 18-11-2020 OF
      JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - II, MAVELIKKARA

    CRIME NO.1226/2019 OF Nooranadu Police Station , Alappuzha


PETITIONER/S:

                SOOPI
                AGED 31 YEARS
                SIBI MANZIL, CHERUVALLOOR MURI,
                CHERIYANADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR
                689506

                BY ADV. SRI.P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE

RESPONDENT/S:

                STATE OF KERALA
                REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA
                682031

                R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

OTHER PRESENT:

                SRI.SANTHOSH PETER SR PP

     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION            ON
05.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Bail Appl..No.9053 OF 2020           2




                               O R D E R

Dated this the 5th day of January 2021 Application for regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant is the 1st accused in Crime No.1226/2019 of Nooranad Police Station, Alappuzha for having allegedly committed offence punishable under Section 379 r/w Section 34 of IPC. This is the second successive bail application for bail. The earlier application for bail as B.A. No.8078/2020 was rejected by this Court on 30.11.2020. The applicant states that there is a change of circumstances. The investigation has progressed well and there is a possibility of a final report being filed in the near future. The applicant has been in custody in this case for 56 days.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 06.08.2019 at about 12.40 p.m., the applicant in furtherance of common intention with the 2nd accused, trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and stole two goats from there.

3. On 11.11.2020, the applicant was arrested and produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate and remanded to judicial custody and continues to remain in custody. Bail Appl..No.9053 OF 2020 3

4. The application for bail is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor that the applicant is involved in another crime for having been in possession of narcotic drugs. His earlier application for bail was dismissed stating that investigation was still at the nascent stage and recovery has not been effected.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that Crime No.17/2020 of Chengannur Excise Range was registered against the applicant for offences under the NDPS Act and in that case, he was granted bail by this Court in B.A. No.7590/2020 on 12.11.2020. The applicant could not be released on bail because he is still in custody in this crime. And therefore it is submitted that he may be granted bail.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

7. The learned Public Prosecutor admits that the investigation is almost complete and that there is no possibility of recovering the stolen goats.

Under the circumstances, I do not find any reason for further incarceration of the applicant since the investigation is almost complete and the applicant has been in custody for 56 days and a connected crime involving narcotic drug, he has already been granted bail. There are no other antecedents Bail Appl..No.9053 OF 2020 4 against the applicant. Under the circumstances, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of 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 and on following conditions:-

(i) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for.

(ii) He shall not tamper with evidence, intimidate or influence the witnesses.

(iii) He shall not get involved in similar offences during the currency of the bail.

In case of violation of any bail condition, the prosecution is at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

SD/-

ASHOK MENON JUDGE rmm