Kerala High Court
Rajan @ Rajappan vs The State Of Kerala on 13 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 22ND BHADRA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 6403 OF 2021
CRIME NO.343/2021 OF PUDUKKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1127/2021 OF SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
RAJAN @ RAJAPPAN
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O.AYYAPPAN NAIR, VADASSERY HOUSE, MUTHRATHIKKARA DESOM,
PARAPPUKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 305.
BY ADVS.
K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN
DEEPA K.RADHAKRISHNAN
BIJU KUMAR
RESPONDENT/STATE OF KERALA:
THE STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT
ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
PP.C.N PRABHAKARAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.09.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.6403 OF 2021(A) 2
ORDER
Dated this the 13th day of September,2021
Application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime
No.343/2021 of Pudukkad Police Station, which is registered
under Sections 324, 307, 325 r/w. 34 IPC.
3. Prosecution case is that on 03.07.2021 at about 4.15
p.m the petitioner along with the other accused in furtherance of
their common intention wrongfully restrained the mother of the
defacto complainant and attempted to kill her by inflicting an
injury on her neck by using a chopper. It is further alleged that
when the defacto complainant attempted to obstruct the attack,
he had also sustained a cut injury beneath his left palm. The
motive behind the incident is alleged to be the boundary dispute
between the mother-in-law of the defacto complainant and the
1st accused.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
petitioner has been in custody from 04.07.2021. Recovery is
over. Hence continued confinement of the petitioner is not
required and hence he prayed for granting bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor strongly objects in
considering the petition in view of the grievous nature of the
offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. It is
also reported by the learned Public Prosecutor on instruction
that the petitioner is not involved in any other crime. Petitioner
has been under confinement from 04.07.2021 onwards. As
rightly contended by the counsel for the petitioner continued
confinement of the petitioner is not required in this case. He has
no criminal antecedents also. Incident also alleged to have
occurred in connection with dispute with regard to a pathway.
2nd accused is already on bail.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances and taking into
account the period of confinement already undergone by the
petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to
the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his
executing bond for a sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees
seventy five thousand only) with two solvent sureties
for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the court
having jurisdiction.
(ii) The petitioner shall report before the investigating
officer on every Monday and Friday between 9.00 a.m
and 11.00 a.m for three months or until the Final
Report is filed, whichever is earlier.
(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the
trial court within ten days from the date of his release
on bail and in case he does not have any passport, he
shall file an affidavit to that effect.
(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
learned Magistrate is empowered to cancel the bail in
accordance with the law.
Sd/-
M.R.ANITHA
shg JUDGE
