Eldhose vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5598 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
         THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                       BAIL APPL. NO. 3179 OF 2022
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Bail Appl. 9446/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
                                  KERALA
    CRIME NO.2508/2021 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
                                DISTRICT
PETITIONER:


     1        ELDHOSE
              AGED 27 YEARS
              PUTHANPURACKAL HOUSE, SOCIETYPPADY BHAGAM, MALIPPARA
              KARA, PINDIMANA VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING IN THE RENTED HOUSE
              OF VARGHESE AT PUTHUKKAYIL HOUSE, CHENKARA MUDIYARA
              BHAGAM, MALIPPARA KARA, PINDIMANA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686692
              BY ADVS.
              P.M.RAFIQ
              Salil Narayanan
              ROY THOMAS (MUVATTUPUZHA)
              M.REVIKRISHNAN, MITHA SUDHINDRAN
              AJEESH K.SASI, SRUTHY N. BHAT
              RAHUL SUNIL, SRUTHY K.K


RESPONDENT:


              STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
              PIN - 682031
              BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


OTHER PRESENT:
           SRI. M.C. ASHI (PP)

    THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. No.3179 of 2022

                                         2

                                     ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.2508/2021 of

Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam District alleging commission of

offences under Sections 326, 302, 201 and Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had

borrowed money from the deceased and on 10-10-2021, the petitioner had

called the deceased and required him to come to his house for the purpose

of collecting the money lent by the deceased to the petitioner. It is alleged

that when the deceased arrived at the house of the petitioner he was

brutally attacked, as a result of which he succumbed to his injuries.

Thereafter, the petitioner together with the 2nd accused (father of the

petitioner) allegedly took the body of the deceased on the scooter of the

deceased and dumped the body and the scooter in a nearby canal.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. It is submitted that the

deceased had actually attempted to attack the petitioner and his parents

and this was only prevented by the petitioner. It is submitted that the BAIL APPL. No.3179 of 2022

petitioner has been in custody from 14-10-2021 and his continued

detention is not required for the purposes of any investigation as the final

report has already been filed in the matter. It is submitted that the

petitioner has no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the petitioner is

aged only 27 years and this is not a case where the custodial trial of the

petitioner is warranted

5. The learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel

appearing for the de facto complainant (brother of the deceased) would

submit that the petitioner is not entitled to bail. The manner and method of

commission of offence and the fact that the petitioner with the 2 nd accused

had dumped the body of the deceased in a canal are pointed out to show

that the killing of the deceased was not an accident. It is submitted that

considering the brutal nature of the crime the petitioner is not entitled to be

released on bail. It is also pointed out that as a result of the murder of the

deceased his family consisting of his wife and 3 minor children have been

orphaned.

6. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that this Court can take into consideration the fact that the petitioner has

been in custody for 224 days as a change of circumstances for granting of BAIL APPL. No.3179 of 2022

bail despite the rejection of the bail application of the petitioner in the

month of February, 2022.

7. Though the learned counsel appearing for the de facto

complainant vehemently opposes the grant of bail, considering the totality

of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that the

petitioner has been in custody for 224 days and a final report has already

been filed in the matter, I am inclined to direct that the petitioner can be

granted bail, subject to conditions.

8. In the result, this application is allowed and it is directed that

the petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.2508/2021 of Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam District on every Saturday at 11.00 am until further orders;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to contact the de facto complainant or influence or intimidate the de facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.2508/2021 of Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam District;

BAIL APPL. No.3179 of 2022

(iv) The petitioner shall not enter the local limits of the Kothamangalam Police Station where the victim is residing except for the purpose of complying with condition No.(ii) above;

(v) 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.2508/2021 of Kothamangalam Police Station, Ernakulam

District may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for

cancellation of bail.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE

bng/27.05.2022