Anas vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 22726 Ker

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT

                       THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.

            FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1943

                              BAIL APPL. NO. 8742 OF 2021

     AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 2740/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS

                       COURT,TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

            CRIME NO.1886/2021 OF FORT POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPUARAM

PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 to 3 :

      1      ANAS
             AGED 25 YEARS
             S/O.NAVAS, T.C.39/1832, KARIMADOM, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
             DISTRICT.

      2      ASHIK
             AGED 24 YEARS
             S/O.SAINULABUDEEN, T.C.39/1832(104)., KARIMADOM, MANACAUD,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

      3      SANOOJ
             AGED 22 YEARS
             S/O.NJAMUDEEN, T.C.39/155, KARIMADOM, MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

             BY ADVS.
             SHAJIN S.HAMEED
             MELWIN BYJU



RESPONDENT/ STATE :

             STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
             ERNAKULAM, PIN CODE - 682 031.


OTHER PRESENT:

             SMT. V.SREEJA-PP


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.11.2021, THE COURT

ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A.8742 /2021
                                     2

                                  ORDER

Dated this the 19th day of November, 2021

Application for regular bail.

2. Petitioners are accused in Crime No.1886/2021 of Fort

Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 326, 308 r/w

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution allegation is as follows:- The brother in law

of the defacto complainant had married the sister of the 2 nd

accused. Subsequently, their relationship strained and she was

harassed and manhandled by him. Later he deserted her. So the

2nd accused/2nd petitioner was entertaining enmity towards the

defacto complainant as well as his brother-in-law. On

15.10.2021 at about 16.30 hours, these petitioners have

attempted to attack the brother-in-law of the defacto

complainant and when he got information about it, he rushed to B.A.8742 /2021

the spot. Then these petitioners together have attacked him with

an iron rod, cement block etc. and caused various injuries

including fracture and thereby the petitioners have committed

the aforesaid offences.

2. The petitioners 1 and 2 are in custody since 22.10.2021 and

the third petitioner is in custody since 21.10.2021.

3. The learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners admitted

that there was some dispute between the brother in law of

defacto complainant and his wife who is the sister of the 2nd

petitioner. But these petitioners never attacked the defacto

complainant as alleged by the prosecution. But they are

undergoing unnecessary incarceration for the last one month.

The said submission is refuted by the learned Public Prosecutor

mainly relying on the wound certificate of the defacto

complainant who sustained severe injuries including fracture.

But now the defacto complainant has been discharged from the

hospital and the investigation of the case is well in progress. B.A.8742 /2021

The prosecution has no case that the brother in law of the

defacto complainant had sustained any injuries from the

petitioners.

5. The prosecution records would reveal that the weapons

used by the petitioners to inflict injures on the defacto

complainant had already been recovered. Moreover, the

investigation has also considerably progressed and so their

further detention is not necessary. The prosecution has no case

that any of these petitioners are having criminal antecedents

Moreover, all of them are youngsters. Taking into consideration

all these facts, I am inclined to release them on bail subject to

the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.

(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required by him, in B.A.8742 /2021

writing.

(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.

JUDGE

al/-