Kerala High Court
Arjun vs State Of Kerala on 2 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 8235 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 2194/2021 OF II ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT COURT,ERNAKULAM,
CRIME NO.997/2021 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
PETITIONERS:
1 ARJUN
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. ARUN KUMAR, PALATH HOUSE, CHITTATTIKARA P.O,
VADAKKEKAKRA VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 683513
2 NIJIN VENU
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. VENU, KULAVELIPPADATH HOUSE, MURAVANTHURUTH KARA,
VADAKKEKKARA VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 683522
3 VIDHU KRISHNA
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. DILEEP AANATTU HOUSE, CHITTATTUKARA P.O,
VADAKKEKAKRA VILLAGE, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM 683513
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA 682 031 (CRIME NO. 997/2021 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE
STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682 031)
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. C.N. PRABHAKARAN (SR.PP)
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 8235 OF 2021
2
ORDER
This is an application for regular bail.
2. Petitioners are the accused Nos.2 to 4 in Crime No.997/2021 of
Vadakkekara Police Station, Ernakulam District registered alleging
commission of offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294(b), 427, 308 r/w
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that, on 10.10.2021,
they had occurred a dispute between the petitioners and the de-facto
complainant regarding overtaking of the vehicle of the petitioners and that
following the same, the petitioners assaulted the de-facto complainant and
his minor son and thereby, they committed the offences alleged against
them. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the only
non-bailable offence alleged against the petitioners is that under Section
308 IPC. He submits that even accepting the entire case of the de-facto
complainant to be true, the offence under Section 308 IPC is not attracted
as the allegation is that the 1st accused attempted to hit the minor son of the
de-facto complainant with a stone and had the de-facto complainant not
averted the same, the same would have resulted in serious injuries which
BAIL APPL. NO. 8235 OF 2021
may even have lead to the death of the son of the de-facto complainant.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit
that the investigation in the matter is progressing and that the allegations
against the petitioners are serious. It is submitted that there are increasing
incidents of road rage and such incidents must be curbed with an iron
hand. He submits that the release of the petitioners on bail may hamper the
progress of the investigation.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
prima facie being convinced that the offence under Section 308 may not be
attracted in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant
bail to the petitioners. The petitioners are in custody from 11.10.2021.
6. Accordingly, this application for bail application is allowed and
it is directed that the petitioners shall be released on bail subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioners shall execute bonds for sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two
solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of
the Jurisdictional Court;
(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer
BAIL APPL. NO. 8235 OF 2021
in Crime No.997/2021 of Vadakkekara Police station on every
Saturday at 11 am until further orders;
(iii) The petitioners shall not attempt to influence or intimidate
the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.997/2021
of Vadakkekara Police Station;
(iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any other crime while
on bail.
7. If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating
officer in Crime No.997/2021 of Vadakkekara Police Station may file an
application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.
The observations in this order are only prima facie for the purpose of
considering the grant of bail to the petitioners and shall not be treated as a
finding on any aspect before any Court.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
bng/02.11.2021
