Devaraj Thavorath vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 24, 2022

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1525934

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/1525934
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.
Decided On: Jan 24, 2022
Case Number: Bail Appl./8195/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Devaraj Thavorath

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....alleging commission of offences under sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 326 and 308 read with section 149 of the indian penal code. the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner together with the other accused in the case attacked the de-facto complainant, causing severe injuries to him.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit thatthe petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. he submits with reference to annexure - 1 wound certificate, issued in respect of one dhanraj, that the de-facto complainant and others had attacked dhanraj, causing serious injuries to him and the petitioner had gone to the place and had taken dhanraj to the hospital. it is submitted that the petitioner was roped in as an accused only on account of the aforesaid facts. it is submitted that the aforesaid dhanraj had an amputation on account of the attack by the de-facto complainant, while the alleged wound certificate in respect of the de-facto complainant, which is produced as annexure - 8 shows that noserious injuries were caused to the de-facto complainant. it was submitted that the petitioner's mother is a chronic heart patient and the continuous attention of the petitioner is absolutely necessary for her. it is submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely not necessary.4. the learned public prosecutor opposes the grant ofanticipatory bail. he submits that crime no.622 of 2021 of dharmadam police station was registered against the de-facto complainant in this case at the instance of the brother of the aforesaid dhanraj. it is submitted that the de-facto complainant in this case is the accused in that crime. it is submitted that there also the offence under section 326 of the indian penal code, has been invoked. it is submitted that the accused in that case got regular bail after one month of custody and that the petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail.5. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 4TH MAGHA, 1943 CRIME NO.617/2021 OF DHARMADAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2: DEVARAJ THAVORATH AGED 34 YEARS S/O.YASODA, DWARAKA HOUSE, MELUR.P.O, PALAYAD, DHARMADAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. V.BINOY RAM P.PREMARAJAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031. SRI. NOUSHAD K.A. (SR.PP) THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.617 of 2021

of Dharmadam Police Station, Kannur District, alleging commission of offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 326 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner together with the other accused in the case attacked the de-facto complainant, causing severe injuries to him.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter. He submits with reference to Annexure - 1 wound certificate, issued in respect of one Dhanraj, that the de-facto complainant and others had attacked Dhanraj, causing serious injuries to him and the petitioner had gone to the place and had taken Dhanraj to the hospital. It is submitted that the petitioner was roped in as an accused only on account of the aforesaid facts. It is submitted that the aforesaid Dhanraj had an amputation on account of the attack by the de-facto complainant, while the alleged wound certificate in respect of the de-facto complainant, which is produced as Annexure - 8 shows that no

serious injuries were caused to the de-facto complainant. It was submitted that the petitioner's mother is a chronic heart patient and the continuous attention of the petitioner is absolutely necessary for her. It is submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is absolutely not necessary.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the grant of

anticipatory bail. He submits that Crime No.622 of 2021 of Dharmadam Police Station was registered against the de-facto complainant in this case at the instance of the brother of the aforesaid Dhanraj. It is submitted that the de-facto complainant in this case is the accused in that crime. It is submitted that there also the offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code, has been invoked. It is submitted that the accused in that case got regular bail after one month of custody and that the petitioners are not entitled to anticipatory bail.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits with

reference to the wound certificate issued in respect of the aforesaid Dhanraj and Annexure - 8 wound certificate in respect of the de- facto complainant that very serious injuries were caused to Dhanraj, while the de-facto complainant has suffered little or no injury. It is also submitted that the recovery has been effected and the custody

of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of any investigation.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

and considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner and taking into account the fact that for the purpose of investigation, custody of the petitioner may not be required, I am of the opinion that the petitioner can be granted bail subject to conditions.

7. In the result, this application is allowed and it is directed

that the petitioner shall be released on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.617 of 2021 of Dharmadam Police Station, Kannur District, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation

and shall appear before the investigating officer at 09.00AM on 01.02.2022 and on 03.02.2022 in Crime No.617 of 2021 of Dharmadam Police Station, Kannur District and thereafter, whenever called upon to do so;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence or intimidate the de-facto complainant or any witness in Crime No.617 of 2021 of Dharmadam Police Station, Kannur District;

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No.617 of 2021 of Dharmadam Police Station, Kannur District, may file an application before the Jurisdictional Court, for cancellation of bail. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Devaraj Thavorath vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Gopinath P.