Akhil vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20920 Ker

BAIL APPL. NO. 7323 OF 2021           1




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
   WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943
                     BAIL APPL. NO. 7323 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1507/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT &
                   SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM, KOLLAM
        (crime no.168/2021 of kilikolloor police station)
PETITIONER/ACCUSED

            AKHIL
            AGED 26 YEARS
            S/O. THAMARAKSHAN, POOVANNAVIL THODIYIL,
            CHANDANATHOPE CHERRY, KOTTAYAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM -
            691506.
            BY ADVS.
            PRATHEESH.P(P-570)
            ANJANA KANNATH


RESPONDENTS/STATE:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
            KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682031.
    2       STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            KILIKOLLOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691004.

OTHER PRESENT:

            SRI. NOUSHAD.K.A- SR.PP



     THIS   BAIL   APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 7323 OF 2021              2




                                   ORDER

Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.168 of 2021 of

Kilikolloor Police Station registered for the offences punishable under

Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 294(b) and 436 read with Section

149 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. He has been in custody since 08.8.2021.

4. The allegation is that this petitioner was in love with the

sister of the defacto complainant. She was given in marriage with

another person. So he was entertaining enmity towards the defacto

complainant. Due to his enemity on 08.03.2021 he along with the

other accused have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and

in prosecution of the common object to attack the defacto

complainant trespassed into his property in the night and hurled

abuses towards the defacto complainant and when the husband of the

girl came out the house, he was stabbed with a broken bottle

inflicting a deep injury on his face. Immediately he was removed to

the hospital. In the night, when there was no one in the house the

accused again trespassed into the courtyard of the residential house

and set ablaze to the residential house causing damages to the tune

of Rs.3,00,000/- and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the

learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a plea of

false implication and pleaded that he has been falsely implicated by

the defacto complainant, the brother of the girl due to his enmity

towards him. In fact he has not committed any offence. But he is

languishing in jail since the date of his arrest.

7. This contention is refuted by the learned Public Prosecutor

mainly pointing out the criminal antecedents of him. The learned

Public Prosecutor submitted the Mahazar as well as the relevant

records to show that this petitioner has set fire to the residential

house causing damages to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/-. The damage

was assessed with the assistance of a PWD Engineer. The petitioner is

also involved in other criminal cases including Arms Act, is the further

submission of the learned Public Prosecutor.

8. It is true that the petitioner is aged only 26 years. But the

accusation levelled against him is grave and serious in nature.

Moreover he is having criminal antecedents. Of course in one case he

was acquitted as pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner,

but the other cases are still pending. But taking into account of the

fact that the charge sheet sheet has been submitted after

investigation on 14.9.2021 as well the fact that he has been

languishing in jail since the date of his arrest, I am inclined to release

him on bail subject to the following conditions.

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction. One surety shall be his close relative.

(ii) The petitioner has to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- within two weeks of his release before the jurisdictional court. The time for deposit will not be extended further.

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the court concerned. If he is not having a passport, he shall file an affidavit regarding the same before the court, within a week for his release on bail.

(iv) The petitioner 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.

(v) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.

In case of violation of any of the above conditions,

the jurisdictional court is at liberty to cancel the bail in

accordance with the law.

Sd/-

SHIRCY V.

JUDGE smm