Kerala High Court
Vinod. K vs State Of Kerala on 20 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022/ 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 9785 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP 5154/2022 OF DISTRICT
COURT & SESSIONS & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ,KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
VINOD. K
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. KUTTIYAN K,
PUTHIYAPURAYIL HOUSE,
VIVEKANANDA NAGAR, AJANUR
KOLAVAYAL, KASARAGODE, KERALA
PIN - 671315
BY ADVS.
RAHUL SASI
NEETHU PREM
MANU K. MURALI
ANAND MAHADEVAN
RESPONDENT/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
HOSDURG POLICE STATION,
KASARAGOD, KERALA.
PIN - 671315
ADDL.R3 RAJESH N V
S/O. KRISHNAN K.,
KRISHNA HOUSE, KANHANGAD VILLAGE,
KASARGODE DISTRICT IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R3 AS PER
ORDER DATED 15/12/2022 IN CRL MA 1/2022.
BY ADV THOMAS T.VARGHESE
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.PP - SMT. SEETHA S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A. No.9785 of 2022 :2:
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
B.A. No.9785 of 2022
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Dated this the 20th day of December, 2022
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.1396/2022 of
Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District, alleging commission of
offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326, 447 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution allegation is that, on 25.10.2022 at about
10.30 am, the petitioner and other accused attacked the defacto
complainant by throwing stones and attacked with key chain. The
petitioner is said to have attacked with key chain on the face of the
defacto complainant. Due to the incident, the defacto complainant
suffered serious injuries and suffered loss of a tooth and loosening
of two other teeth and thus committed the above said offences.
4 .The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is in
fact the petitioner was attacked by the defacto complainant and he
sustained nasal bone fracture in the scuffle and that necessary
medical certificate in this regard was produced along with the bail
application filed before the Sessions Court, which culminated in
Annexure A2 order. The petitioner refers to paragraph 4 of the bail
order which reveals that he has produced a wound certificate
before the Sessions Court along with the bail application, in order
to substantiate that he sustained injuries in the alleged incident. It
is further submitted that the petitioner and the defacto
complainant are relatives and there is an ongoing property dispute
between them. It is further contended that there is a delay of two
days in lodging the FIR, which is not explained. It is also submitted
by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 2 nd accused is
already granted bail by this Court in B. A. No.9139/2022.
5. The defacto complainant entered appearance through
counsel and seriously opposed the application for bail mainly
contending that he sustained serious injuries in the alleged attack
and that serious overtacts are alleged against the petitioner.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions submitted
that the injuries sustained by the defacto complainant was inflicted
by the petitioner, but submitted that the petitioner has no other
criminal antecedents.
7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case
and considering the nature of the allegations, I am of the opinion
that custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be required
for the purpose of investigation and only a limited custody be
granted for the same. Therefore, I am inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner subject to stringent conditions. In the result, this
application is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner shall
surrender before the investigating officer on 26.12.2022, at 11
a.m, and subject himself for interrogation on that day and on any
other day/days as directed by the investigating officer. The
petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. In the event of
arrest in Crime No.1396/2022 of Hosdurg Police Station,
Kasaragod District, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional
Court on the very same day and shall be released on bail, subject
to the following conditions:-
(i) Petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two
solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the
satisfaction of the jurisdictional court ;
(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the
investigating officer in Crime No.1396/2022 of
Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District, on every
Saturday, at 11 am, until the filing of the final report;
(iii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating
officer in Crime No.1396/2022 of Hosdurg Police
Station, Kasaragod District as and when summoned
to do so;
(iv) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the
victim or the defacto complainant or interfere with
the investigation or to influence or intimidate any
witness in Crime No.1396/2022 of Hosdurg Police
Station, Kasaragod District;
(v) The petitioner shall not enter the jurisdictional
limit of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod, for a
period of two months;
(vi) The petitioner shall not involve in any other
crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the
investigating officer in Crime No.1396/2022 of Hosdurg Police
Station, Kasaragod District may file an application before the
jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to
investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the
information if any given by the petitioner, even when the petitioner
is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila
Aggarwal and others v. State(NCT of Delhi) and
another(2020(1)KHC 663).
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
sm/
