Kerala High Court
Rubin Omer vs The State Of Kerala on 30 September, 2021
BAIL APPL. NO. 6727 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V.
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943
BAIL APPL. NO. 6727 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1014/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT,THALASSERY, KANNUR
PETITIONER:
RUBIN OMER
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O. UMMER K.C, RESIDING AT OMERS, UKKAS MOTTA, KADIRUR
P.O, THALASSERY
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
P.MARTIN JOSE
THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
R.GITHESH
SACHIN JACOB AMBAT
ANNA LINDA V.J
P.PRIJITH
AJAY BEN JOSE
MANJUNATH MENON
HARIKRISHNAN S.
T.P.SAJID
RESPONDENTS
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM 682 031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
THALASSERY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN 670 101
3 FASILA T
W/O ASIF E.P, AMINAS, CHAMPAD P.O, THALASSERY, PIN 670
694
SRI.MANU.P.G- SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6727 OF 2021 2
ORDER
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.364 of 2021 of
Thalassery Police Station registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 304 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved
this application for pre-arrest bail.
2. The prosecution allegation is that on 20.7.2021 at about 10.00
p.m, the accused was driving a Pajero car bearing Reg.No.KL-18-E/3
through the public road at Thalassery near new bus stand and he had
overtaken the vehicle with the knowledge that if he hit on a person,
death will be caused. Still he drove the car in a rash and negligent
manner that too in excessive speed and hit on a scooter which was on
the road side bearing Reg.No.KL-58-U/9615 and due to the impact of the
hit, the rider of the scooter fell into the drainage on the side of the road
and sustained very serious injuries. Though he was shifted to the hospital
immediately, he succumbed to the injuries on the next day while
undergoing treatment in MIMS hospital, Kannur and thereby the
petitioner has committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is
true that the deceased died as he was hit by the car driven by this
petitioner. But it was purely a road traffic accident. The accused was
driving his car carefully, but the accident occurred as the rider of the
scooter came from a side road all on a sudden and he fell down and
sustained injuries as the car hit him accidentally. The petitioner is aged
only 20 years pursuing his studies. It is further submitted that the
custodial interrogation of this petitioner is quite unnecessary as it is only
a road traffic accident which happened accidentally.
4. The incident happened in the night at 10.00 p.m in the public
road. The petitioner was having the knowledge that it is likely to cause
death as he was driving the vehicle in exorbitant speed. So many
youngsters were with him and they have taken the vehicle without caring
the pedestrians and the other passengers on the road and thus the
incident has happened.
5. It is true that the petitioner is a youngster aged only 20 years.
The deceased who sustained injuries was immediately taken to the
hospital for treatment by his friends who were in the car at the time of
the accident. Though he was given treatment he succumbed to the
injuries as he sustained very grievous injuries in the accident. Whether
an offence under Section 304 of the IPC is attracted or not is a matter to
be considered only at the time of the trial of the case. But the records
indicate that the investigation of the case is well in progress and the
statement of most of the witnesses were recorded and the car driver by
the petitioner was also seized by the police.
6. Considering the nature of the accusation levelled against the
petitioner as well the other facts and circumstances involved in this case,
I could not find any materials to conclude that custodial interrogation of
this petitioner is inevitable. But still the investigating agency has to
collect the details by interrogating the petitioner. So this petition can be
disposed of directing him to surrender before the investigating officer on
7.10.2021 at 10.30 a.m . Upon his surrender, after interrogation he shall
be released on bail on the very same day if his arrest is recorded subject
to the following conditions:
Therefore, this application is allowed subject to the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioner 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 petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for
interrogation as and when required by him in writing. He shall co-
operate with the investigation of the case.
(iii) The petitioner shall surrender his driving licence before the
investigating officer on the date of his arrest. The petitioner is entitled
to get back his driving licence produced before the investigating officer
only on filing a proper application before the Judicial First Class
Magistrate after a month of the investigation.
(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 empowered to cancel the bail in accordance
with the law.
Sd/-
SHIRCY V.
smm JUDGE
