Aniljith vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Aug 01, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1375396

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1375396
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.
Decided On: Aug 01, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./5953/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Aniljith

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....against the petitioner are punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 326, 342 and 365 of indian penal code.3. the prosecution case is that, on 24.12.2022 at 6.30p.m, on account of animosity of the 1 st accused towards the defacto complainant, the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, called the defacto complainant to a place, and thereafter assaulted him with dangerous weapons such as iron rod, thereby causing fracture of his hand. it is also alleged that, the defacto complainant was locked in a room in the house of one vighesh. the crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.4. heard, sri. sarun rajan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and smt.sreeja v, the learned public prosecutor, appearing for the state.5. i have gone through the record. the learned publicprosecutor pointed out that, accused nos.1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 were already arrested by the police in connection with the investigation and the recovery of the weapons and other articles were affected. no criminal antecedents of the petitioner was brought to my notice. from the materials placed on record, the specific overt act against the petitioner is not seen alleged. in such circumstances, i am of the view that, limited custody of the petitioner for the purpose of interrogation would serve the ends of justice.therefore, this application is disposed of with the following conditions:- i) the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself for interrogation. ii) after interrogation, the petitioner shall be released onbail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for rs 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with two sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the investigating officer iii) the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 5953 OF 2023 Crime No. 3/2023 of Changaramkulam Police Station PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ANILJITH AGED 20 YEARS S/O NARAYANAN, KANDAMKULATH VALAPPIL, AYILKKAD POST, EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 679576 BY ADVS. SARUN RAJAN R.ANAS MUHAMMED SHAMNAD C.C.ANOOP ARCHANA HARIDAS K. HOSH P. DAS RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION, CHANGARAMKULAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679575 BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER OTHER PRESENT: SMT.SREEJA-SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No. 3/2023 of

Changaramkulam Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 308, 323, 324, 326, 342 and 365 of Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case is that, on 24.12.2022 at 6.30

p.m, on account of animosity of the 1 st accused towards the defacto complainant, the accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, called the defacto complainant to a place, and thereafter assaulted him with dangerous weapons such as iron rod, thereby causing fracture of his hand. It is also alleged that, the defacto complainant was locked in a room in the house of one Vighesh. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.

4. Heard, Sri. Sarun Rajan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Sreeja V, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State.

5. I have gone through the record. The learned Public

Prosecutor pointed out that, accused Nos.1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 were already arrested by the police in connection with the investigation and the recovery of the weapons and other articles were affected. No criminal antecedents of the petitioner was brought to my notice. From the materials placed on record, the specific overt act against the petitioner is not seen alleged. In such circumstances, I am of the view that, limited custody of the petitioner for the purpose of interrogation would serve the ends of justice.

Therefore, this application is disposed of with the following conditions:- i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself for interrogation. ii) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on

bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer iii) The petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until the filing of the final report. v) The petitioner shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required. vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail. vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact

any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. viii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Magistrate shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A JUDGE rpk

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Aniljith vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Ziyad Rahman a.a.