Gireesh vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 17691 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
       FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 5TH BHADRA, 1943
                        BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021
    AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1592/2021 OF II ADDITIONAL
                    DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM


PETITIONER/S:

            GIREESH
            AGED 37 YEARS
            S/O. OMANAKUTTAN,
            SARAVANA BHAVAN, MARIYATHURUTH KARA,
            AIMANAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
            NOW RESIDING AT NELLIMATTOM KARA,
            PEEDIAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
            KOTHAMANGALAM.

            BY ADV K.V.SABU



RESPONDENT/S:

            STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM.



            BY SMT SEETHA.S, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR




     THIS   BAIL     APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
27.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021
                              2




                           ORDER

Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.

662/2021 of Kalloorkkad Police Station.

2. It is alleged that on 16.07.2021 at about 10.30

a.m, the petitioner/accused trespassed into the residential

house of the defacto complainant at Kalloorkkad and robbed

gold ornaments worth Rs.3,50,000/- after assaulting and

intimidating the defacto complainant and his wife. During

the course, he alleged to have slashed at the hand of wife of

defacto complainant with a knife and Mobile Phone worth

Rs.15,000/- and cash of Rs.1800/- were also robbed. It is

further alleged that he gagged her and forcibly pushed her

down when she resisted and rubbed her face on the floor

and intimidated to do away with her and thereby committed

the offenses punishable under sections 450, 506(ii), 397,

341, 324 and 461 of IPC.

BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021

3. According to the learned counsel for the

petitioner, petitioner has been a gold smith at Coimbathore.

Petitioner's wife's house is just near to the house of the

defacto complainant. His father-in-law is a labourer of

defacto complainant and there was some dispute with

regard to wages and hence he went there as requested by

the wife of defacto complainant for disposing some

ornaments. But defacto complainant made some

altercations with his wife and this false case was foisted

against him. His wife is pregnant and now delivered a child.

He has been arrested on 16.07.2021 and according to him

all the articles were given back and hence taking into

account the period of confinement already undergone, he

has to be released on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor on the other

hand seriously objected in considering the petition in view of

the serious nature of the offence committed by the BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021

petitioner. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, wife

of defacto complainant sustained serious injuries during the

course of the incident and wound certificate of the defacto

complainant has also been produced which shows that on

16.07.2021 at about 11.15 a.m. itself she has been

examined by a doctor and serious injuries has been noted in

the wound certificate. The alleged history told to the Doctor

is assault by an unknown person. So prima facie the

allegation of the petitioner that he was called to the house

of the defacto complainant by the wife and subsequent

altercation and resultant injuries sustained by the wife of the

defacto complainant is not believable. Statement of fact by

the respondent also would prima facie show that by

intimidation and causing physical violence she was taken to

bedroom and got opened the Almirah and robbed gold

ornaments of about 86.250 gms. It is also submitted by the

learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner was not shown BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021

and got identified by the defacto complainant.

5. On evaluating the rival contentions it has come

out prima facie that accused has trespassed into the house

of the defacto complainant and caused hurt to the wife of

the defacto complainant and robbed the valuables. Charge

sheet also filed in time. He has been caught red-handed

with the articles stolen from the house of the defacto

complainant with in hours on the same day. There are

prima facie materials in support of the allegations of

prosecution. These type of offenders are a real threat to the

society. Though personal liberty of individual is one

guaranteed under the constitution and courts are bound to

protect it, it is not absolute in all cases. Valuable right and

liberty of an individual and interest of the society in general

has to be balanced. (See Masroor v. State of U.P [2009

14 SCC 286]). In view of the serious nature of the offence

alleged to have been committed by the petitioner and the BAIL APPL. NO. 6188 OF 2021

circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to be released

on bail.

In the result, Bail Application stands dismissed.

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA JUDGE

avs