Kerala High Court
Vinod vs State Of Kerala on 15 February, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 26TH MAGHA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
CRIME NO.821/2022 OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION, Thiruvananthapuram
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CRMC 2337/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT &
SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/S:
VINOD
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O ANTONY @ SASI, VINOD BHAVAN, MADAVANA LANE,
CHERUKONAM, VETTIKONAM, KARAKULAM VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695564
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHAND
VINAYAK G MENON
BHARAT VIJAY P.
THAREEQ ANVER K.
K.SALMA JENNATH
MAJID MUHAMMED K.
MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON
NEETHU S.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION, ARUVIKKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695543
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
===========================
Crl.M.C.No.1107 of 2024
-------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of February 2024
ORDER
Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.821/2022 of Aruvikkara
Police Station. The said case is now pending consideration as
S.C.No.1885/2023 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
Petitioner is alleged to have committed an offence under Section 302 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Initially by an order dated 17.11.2022 in Crl.M.C.
No.2337/2022, petitioner was granted bail on conditions. One of the
conditions stipulated that, petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the
witnesses or tamper with the evidence or commit any other offence
while he is on bail. However, contrary to the said condition, petitioner is
alleged to have committed an offence under Sections 452, 294(b), 506
and 195A registered as Crime No.514/2023 of Aruvikkara Police Station.
The allegations against the petitioner in the subsequent crime is that he
threatened the witness in the murder case. Immediately thereafter, an
application for cancellation of bail was filed by the prosecution, since
according to them, threatening a witness, that too in a murder case,
would prejudice fair trial and the petitioner was exploiting the liberty
granted to him through bail. The learned Sessions Judge by order dated
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
18.01.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.1164/2023 in Crl.M.C. No.2337/2022 cancelled
the bail which is challenged in this proceeding.
3. Sri.Arun Chand, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended
that the learned Sessions Judge had erred in cancelling the bail,
especially since there is a factual mistake in the order. Learned Counsel
submitted that the learned Sessions Judge had proceeded on the
assumption that petitioner had threatened a witness, who had deposed
in court during trial of the case, which is incorrect as the trial has not yet
started.
4. Sri.K.A.Noushad, learned Public Prosecutor, on the other
hand contended that reference to witness and trial of the case can only
be to the statement given by the witnesses during investigation and
arrayed by the prosecution in the final report. It was submitted that the
said reference to the trial ought not be a reason to interfere with the
impugned order. It was also submitted that when the witnesses in the
case, in which the petitioner himself is an accused are threatened, it is
essential that the liberty granted to the petitioner be revoked.
5. On a consideration of the circumstances of the case, it is
noticed that the subsequent crime against the petitioner is initiated on
the basis of criminal trespass and abusing one of the witnesses of the
prosecution case in which he was granted bail. Though in the
subsequent crime, bail was granted to the petitioner, the same by itself
cannot be a reason to interfere with the impugned order. The learned
Sessions Judge has considered that too correctly, the reasons that are
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
available to cancel the bail. Since one of the witnesses in the case in
which the petitioner was granted bail has been threatened and abused,
it needs no reiteration that fair trial will be prejudiced by the conduct of
the petitioner.
6. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the
impugned order cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
sd/
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
jm/
CRL.MC NO. 1107 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.821/2022
OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/11/2022
IN CRL M.C. NO.2337/2022 PASSED BY THE
SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.514/2023
OF ARUVIKKARA POLICE STATION
Annexure A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02/05/2023
IN CRL M.C. NO.1121 OF 2023 PASSED BY THE
SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Annexure A5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/01/2024
IN CRL M.P. NO.1164/2023 IN CRL M.C.
NO.2337/2022 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS COURT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
