Full Judgment
..1..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023/16TH KARTHIKA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 9146 OF 2023 CRIME NO.1001/2023 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RAMEES, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O SHAJIR, VELIYIL PARAMBIL, AKSHARA NAGAR -90,NEAR MUTHIRAPARAMBU MOSQUE, KUREEPUZHA, KOLLAM WEST , KOALLAM DISTRICT,KERALA, PIN - 691001. BY ADV. SRI. NAHAS H. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031. SMT. T.V. NEEMA, SR.P.P. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..
MOHAMMED NIAS C. P. , J.
========================= B. A. No. 9146 of 2023 ========================= Dated this the 7th day of November, 2023
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 1001/2023 of Kollam West Police Station, for having committed offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324 & 308 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that, on 23.9.2023, the petitioner
questioned the defacto complainant about the petitioner's friend at a bar. At that time, the defacto complainant and the petitioner quarrelled in the bar. Then, on the same day, the petitioner went to the defacto complainant's place and uttered words against him in his absence. When the defacto complainant came to the petitioner, the petitioner beat the defacto complainant and sustained injury. Further, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with a dangerous weapon like a sword causing injury on the back side of the body of the defacto complainant. Thus, the petitioner herein is alleged to have committed the offences mentioned above.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated with ..3.. ulterior motives. At any rate, he points out that the petitioner is in custody from 24.9.2023 and the continued custody of the petitioner is unnecessary.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and points out that the petitioner is not entitled to get bail.
5. After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel
for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.9.2023, perusing the Wound Certificate and since there is no apprehension raised by the prosecution that if released on bail, the petitioner is likely to abscond, I hold that bail can be granted to the petitioner, notwithstanding the antecedents reported against the petitioner. It is also pointed out that major part of the investigation is over. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to the following conditions:-
i. The 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; ii. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required to do so; ..4.. iii.The petitioner shall not tamper or attempt to tamper with the
evidence or influence or try to influence the witnesses; iv.The petitioner shall not be involved in any other crime while on bail; v. The petitioner shall surrender his Passport before the jurisdictional court. If the petitioner does not have a Passport, he shall execute an affidavit to that effect and file the same before the said court within seven days from the date of his release on bail.
If any of the conditions are violated, the jurisdictional court concerned shall be empowered to take steps for cancellation of bail as per law. Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C. P. , JUDGE MMG ..5.. APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL.NO.9146/2023 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE: ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF FIR