Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE11H FEBRUARY, 2014/22nd MAGHA1935Bail Appl..No. 998 of 2014 () ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 309/2013 OF KUMBLA POLICE STATION , KASARGOD PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ----------------------- NAZER K @ NAZER KANLE AGED39YEARS S/O.MOIDEEN KUNHI, KALMETTA HOUSE P.K.NAGAR BAMBRANNA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SMT.HEMALATHA SRI.BINU GEORGE RESPONDENT/STATE: ----------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON112.2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
=.=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=.= B.A. No. 998 of 2014 =.=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=.= Dated this the 11th day of February, 2014 ORDER
This is an application for bail filed by the first accused in Crime No. 309/2013 of Kumbla Police Station under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on 11.5.2013 at about 4 p.m. the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with common object of committing culpable homicide of the defacto complainant and with that common object wrongfully restrained him and inflicted injuries on him with dangerous weapon and thereby all of them have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 283 , 341, 323, 324, 294 (b) and 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code.
3. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence and he is innocent of the same and he has been falsely implicated in the case. He was arrested on 25.1.2014 and he is in jail from that date on wards. No offence under Section B.A. No. 998 of 2014 2 308 of Indian Penal Code is attracted and his custody is not required any more in this connection with investigation. So he prayed for allowing his application.
4. On the other hand, the application was opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that investigation is not over and other accused are yet to be arrested and the investigation is still in progress and in the preliminary stage.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the case diary file.
6. It is seen from the records that the above case was registered on the basis of the statement given by the defacto complainant/ injured against the present petitioner and others alleging commission of offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 294B and 308 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code originally. Thereafter it was revealed that there are more than five persons involved in the incident and so Section 34 was deleted B.A. No. 998 of 2014 3 and Sections 143, 147, 148 and 283 and 149 of Indian Penal Code were added. Names of the accused Nos. 2 to 5 were also included. The present petitioner was arrested on 25.1.2014 and he was in jail from that day onwards. The vehicle involved in this case has been seized by the police and it has been produced before the Court as well. Though it is alleged that C.W.1 sustained injury no wound certificate of the injured was seen incorporated in the file. It is also seen from the records that earlier the present petitioner along with another person filed an application for anticipatory bail as B.A. No. 4293/2013 and this court has dismissed that application as per order dated 12.8.2013. It is thereafter that the present petitioner was arrested on 25.1.2014. However, I am not at this stage going into the question as to whether the offence under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code is attracted or not as it is a matter for evidence. However, custody of the petitioner is not required any more in connection with the investigation. Merely because other accused persons were not B.A. No. 998 of 2014 4 arrested is not a ground to deny bail to the petitioner, if his custody is not required in connection with the investigation. The Prosecutor has no case that the petitioner has got any criminal background as well. So considering the circumstances, I feel that bail can be granted to the petitioner with some stringent conditions. So bail application is allowed with the following conditions: i). That the petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each of the like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kasaragod. ii) That the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. for a period of three months and thereafter on the last Saturday of every month between the same timings till the final report is filed. iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation as B.A. No. 998 of 2014 5 and when required by him for this purpose in writing to do so till final report is filed. iv) The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. v) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, with him before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod and if he is not having any passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect before that Court, when the application for execution of the bail on the basis of order of this Court is moved before that Court. vi). The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala except with the prior permission of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod till the disposal of the case. With the above conditions, the bail application is allowed. Sd/- K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE rka B.A. No. 998 of 2014 6 rka