Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shinto vs State of Kerala

Shinto vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 05, 2023
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1358097

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Bail Appl./3465/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shinto

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the petitioner alleging offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with section 34 of the indian penal code.3. the prosecution case in brief is as follows: on 05.04.2023 at 08.30 p.m. accused 1 and 2wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and the 1st accused beat the defacto complainant with hand and the 2nd accused hit the head of the defacto complainant with a stone. the petitioner is the 2 nd accused. hence it is alleged that the petitioner has committed the bail appl.no.3465/2023 3 offences. the petitioner was arrested in connection with the above case on 06.04.2023.4. heard the counsel for the petitioner and the public prosecutor. the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 and he is ready to abide by any conditions ifthis court grant him bail. the public prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. the public prosecutor submitted that the injured sustained very serious injuries.5. it is true that the injured sustained veryserious injuries in this case. but the continued detention of the petitioner is not necessary in this case and the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 onwards. the petitioner can be released on bail on stringent conditions. there can be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on all mondays till final report is filed. with that condition this bail bail appl.no.3465/2023 4 application can be allowed.6. 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) scale870), 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.7. considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 15TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3465 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 484/2023 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC), MANJERI PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2: SHINTO AGED 24 YEARS S/O SABU, THADATHIL PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, KOUKKAD, EDAKKARA, NILAMBURTALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679331 BY ADV M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN-PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 2 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------- B.A.No.3465 of 2023 ------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of May, 2023

ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code .

2. The petitioner is accused in Crime No.337 of 2023 of Edakkara Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows: On 05.04.2023 at 08.30 p.m. accused 1 and 2

wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant and the 1st accused beat the defacto complainant with hand and the 2nd accused hit the head of the defacto complainant with a stone. The petitioner is the 2 nd accused. Hence it is alleged that the petitioner has committed the BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 3 offences. The petitioner was arrested in connection with the above case on 06.04.2023.

4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 and he is ready to abide by any conditions if

this Court grant him bail. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the Bail Application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the injured sustained very serious injuries.

5. It is true that the injured sustained very

serious injuries in this case. But the continued detention of the petitioner is not necessary in this case and the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 onwards. The petitioner can be released on bail on stringent conditions. There can be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays till Final Report is filed. With that condition this Bail BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 4 Application can be allowed.

6. 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.

7. 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. Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 5

2. The petitioner shall appear before the

Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.

4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

5. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays at 11.00 a.m. till Final Report is filed.

6. If any of the above conditions are violated by

the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 6 in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE MC BAIL APPL.NO.3465/2023 7 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3465/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.337/2023 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SESSIONS JUDGE MANJERI, MALAPPURAM Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. Annexure A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.80/2020 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION Annexure A5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN 252/2019 OF EDAKKARA POLICE Annexure A6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.160/2019 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial