Kerala High Court
Amal Dev vs State Of Kerala on 10 June, 2021
BAIL APPL. NO. 4239 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 4239 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 900/2021 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS COURT - VI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.2 AND 4:
1 AMAL DEV
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.SUDEVAN PILLAI, KARTHIKA BHAVAN, KAITHKETTU, KALLARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 609.
2 ARUJUN
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O.BABU, R.B.VILLA, PANKADU, KALLARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 609.
BY ADV LIJU. M.P (K/3405/1999)-16842
RESPONDENTS
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM-682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
AJITH MURALI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 4239 OF 2021 2
ORDER
Application for pre-arrest bail.
2. The petitioners are the accused Nos.2 and 4 in Crime No.361 of
2021 of Pangode Police Station registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 294(b), 324, 308, 506 and 427 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution allegation is that these petitioners along with the
other accused have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on
4.4.2021 and trespassed into the residential house of the defacto
complainant at about 4.10 p.m and manhandled him. They have caused
injuries on his scalp and thus attempted to commit culpable homicide.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the
petitioners are aged only 25 and 19 years. It is also submitted that in fact
they are totally innocent of the allegations levelled against them. But on
the previous day the first accused and the defacto complainant had some
altercation between them near a petrol pump and the defacto complainant
had assaulted the first accused. But no crime was registered against the
defacto complainant. Thereafter a false case has been registered against
these petitioners implicating them as the accused in serious offences. In
fact they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution.
But they apprehend unnecessary arrest and hence, this application.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the investigation
of the case is well in progress. The defacto complainant has been
discharged from the hospital though he is alleged to have sustained serious
injuries. It is also submitted that the investigation of the case is well in
progress.
7. Considering the nature of the accusations levelled against these
petitioners as well the other facts and circumstances involved in this case
especially the present pandemic situation of our country, I think that
anticipatory bail as prayed for by the petitioners can be granted in their
favour subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on executing bond for a sum
of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for
the like sum each in the event of arrest by the police in connection with
the above crime.
(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation as and when required by him in writing. They shall co-
operate with the investigation of the case.
(iii) The petitioners 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any
police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the learned
Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in accordance with the law.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
smm JUDGE
