Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 1ST POUSHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 10418 OF 2023 CRIME NO.1812/2023 OF THRIKKAKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM AGAINST THE ORDER IN CRMC 3051/2023 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED: PRANAV AGED 23 YEARS S/O.PRASAD, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, THUTHIYOOR, CSEZ P.O, COCHIN SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE S.O, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682037 BY ADV SUBI K. RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SMT. T.V. NEEMA, SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A.No.10418 of 2023 :2:
ORDER
Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2023 Apprehending arrest in Crime No.1812/2023 of Thrikkakara Police Station, Ernakulam, registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the 3rd accused has filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner, along with
other accused persons on 24.09.2023, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the knowledge that all of them were members of unlawful assembly, and at about 10.30 p.m, wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant while he was travelling in the motorbike due to the enmity in connection with the plying of vehicles through Anamukku Junction. The defacto complainant was dragged down from the motorbike. The second and the third accused wrongfully restrained him. The first accused beat his head using an iron stick. He evaded the blow, and the blow fell on his forehead and sustained injuries. All the accused persons fisted and kicked on him. The
B.A.No.10418 of 2023 :3: defacto complainant sustained injuries. On seeing this, the friend of the defacto complainant intervened. He was also attacked by the 5th accused using a helmet, and they sustained injuries. Thus, the accused persons committed offences alleged against him.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the prosecution allegations are false and the offences against the petitioner will not lie.
4. I have considered the rival contentions.
5. It is seen that this Court had granted an interim order
directing the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days for subjecting himself to interrogation. It was also directed that, on such surrender, 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 Investigating Officer.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
pursuant to the above order, the petitioner had appeared before the Investigating Officer as directed and has been released on bail. The said order was in force for a period of B.A.No.10418 of 2023 :4: four weeks.
7. In such circumstances, I am inclined to pass an order
making the earlier interim order absolute, subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall appear as and when directed by the Investigating Officer.
(ii) The petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses, tamper with any evidence, or get involved in similar offences while on bail.
(iii) The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional court.
(iv) In case of violation of any of the above
conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court. Sd/- MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE mtk