Kerala High Court
Mohammed Althaf vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
BAIL APPL. NO. 3268 OF 2022
CRIME NO.179/2019 OF Venjaramoodu Police Station,
Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/S:
1 MOHAMMED ALTHAF
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O SAJEEV, RESIDING AT PUTHENVILA VEEDU,
NELLANAD, VAMANAPURAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU
TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695606
2 DEEPU
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O RAJAN, RESIDING AT IDATHATTIL VEEDU,
CHERIYAD, KANNICHOD, KULAMACHAL, VAMANAPURAM
VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695606
BY ADVS.
J.R.PREM NAVAZ
ANSAR K.C.
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-2-
BA No.3268 of 2022
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
======================================================
B.A.No.3268 of 2022
=============================================================
Dated this the 4th day of May, 2022
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of
Criminal Procedure Code.
2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.179 of 2019 of
Venjaramoodu Police Station. The above case is registered
against the petitioners and others alleging offences punishable
under Sections 341, 323, 324, 326 and 307 read with 34 IPC
and the petitioners were arrested on 04.04.2022 and they are in
custody.
3.The prosecution case is that on 03.02.2019 at 9.30 pm
the accused wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and
another and attacked them. The injured sustained serious injury
BA No.3268 of 2022
including fracture. Hence, it is alleged that the accused
committed the offence.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner are in custody from 04.04.2022 onwards. The
counsel submitted that the incident happened not as alleged by
the prosecution. The counsel also submitted that even
according to the prosecution, the accused consumed alcohol at
the time of the incident. The counsel submitted that the
petitioners are ready to abide any condition if this Court grant
them bail. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the
bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the
allegation against the petitioners is very serious. It is true that
the allegation against the petitioners is very serious. But the
petitioners are in custody from 04.04.2022 onwards. After
going through the allegation against the petitioners and also
BA No.3268 of 2022
considering the period of detention, I think the petitioners can
be released on bail on stringent conditions.
5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the bail is
the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement
(2019 (16) SCALE 870), after considering all the earlier
judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to
bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule
and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has
the opportunity of securing fair trial.
6. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision
and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this
Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:
1. Petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a
bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only)
BA No.3268 of 2022
each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum
to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
2. The petitioners shall appear before the
Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when
required. The petitioners shall co-operate with the
investigation and 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 them from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to any police officer.
3. Petitioners shall not leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4. Petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to
the offence of which they are accused, or suspected,
of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating
Officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 10 am for a
period of sixty (60) days.
BA No.3268 of 2022
6. If any of the above conditions are violated by the
petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the
bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is
granted by this Court. The prosecution and the
victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional
court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of
the above conditions.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
das
BA No.3268 of 2022
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3268/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A1 THE CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO: 179 OF 2019 OF VENJARAMOODU POLICE
STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
Annexure-A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
11.04.2022 IN C.M.P NO: 584 OF 2022
PASSED BY THE COURT OF COURT OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I,
NEDUMANGADU
