James Johnson vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 30, 2020

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1807484

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/1807484
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Oct 30, 2020
Case Number: Bail Appl./6378/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

James Johnson

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....ipc.3. the prosecution case, in brief, is that the second accusedattempted to destroy a water can and wash basin which was placed in connection with the covid-19 pandemic at st.xavier's nagar, valiyathura and his act was questioned by the de facto complainant. irked with that the second accused destroyed the concrete slab on which the water can was placed by using a hammer at about 8.45 p.m. on 20.03.2020. the de facto complainant again questioned -3- the second accused about that, and at that time, the other accused came there and assaulted the de facto complainant with an iron pipe causing a fracture to the middle finger of his left hand. on seeing this incident, accused 3 to 6 also reached the spot and assaulted the de facto complainant and his friends. the specific overt act attributed to accused 4 to 6 is that they had wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and facilitated accused 1 to 3 to beat him up. that apart, the accused also had committed mischief by destroying valuable properties belonging to the de facto complainant, like a carom board, chess board, water can, slab etc. causing a total loss of rs.3,000/-, and a gold chain worn by the friend of the de facto complainant was also lost in the scuffle which ensued.4. the applicants state that they do not have any criminalantecedents and there is no specific overt act attributed to them, apart from wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant. -4- therefore, they pray that they may be released on anticipatory bail.5. heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned public prosecutor.6. the grievous injury to the de facto complainant wascaused by the first accused with an iron rod. all the remaining accused had only assaulted them with hands. the specific overt act attributed to accused 4 and 5, the applicants herein, is that they had wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant, and that they were also part of the unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1942 Bail Appl..No.6378 OF 2020 CRIME NO.440/2020 OF Valiyathura Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram PETITIONERS/A4 & A5: 1 JAMES JOHNSON AGED 47 YEARS S/O.JOHNSON, TC 44/477, ST.XAVIER’S NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2 EVAN JOHNY AGED 28 YEARS S/O.JOHNY, J.J.HOUSE, TC 44/418-1, ST.XAVIER’S NAGAR, VALIYATHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM - 682031. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI.AJITH MURALI . PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

O R D E R

Dated this the 30th day of October 2020 This is an application seeking anticipatory bail.

2. The applicants are accused 4 and 5 in Crime

No.440/2020 of Valiyathura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 341 and 427 read with Section 149 IPC.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the second accused

attempted to destroy a water can and wash basin which was placed in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic at St.Xavier's Nagar, Valiyathura and his act was questioned by the de facto complainant. Irked with that the second accused destroyed the concrete slab on which the water can was placed by using a hammer at about 8.45 p.m. on 20.03.2020. The de facto complainant again questioned -3- the second accused about that, and at that time, the other accused came there and assaulted the de facto complainant with an iron pipe causing a fracture to the middle finger of his left hand. On seeing this incident, accused 3 to 6 also reached the spot and assaulted the de facto complainant and his friends. The specific overt act attributed to accused 4 to 6 is that they had wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and facilitated accused 1 to 3 to beat him up. That apart, the accused also had committed mischief by destroying valuable properties belonging to the de facto complainant, like a carom board, chess board, water can, slab etc. causing a total loss of Rs.3,000/-, and a gold chain worn by the friend of the de facto complainant was also lost in the scuffle which ensued.

4. The applicants state that they do not have any criminal

antecedents and there is no specific overt act attributed to them, apart from wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant. -4- Therefore, they pray that they may be released on anticipatory bail.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicants and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The grievous injury to the de facto complainant was

caused by the first accused with an iron rod. All the remaining accused had only assaulted them with hands. The specific overt act attributed to accused 4 and 5, the applicants herein, is that they had wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant, and that they were also part of the unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object. I find that there is no necessity for custodial interrogation of the applicants and they are entitled to pre-arrest bail.

7. In the result, the bail application is allowed and the

applicants are directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks. In the event of their being arrested, after interrogation, they shall be released on bail on execution of a bond -5- for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties, each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer and on the following conditions:

(i) They shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for and co-operate with the investigation.

(ii) They shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate or influence the witnesses.

(iii) They shall not get involved in any similar offence during

the currency of the bail. In case of breach of any of the above bail conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE jg

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties James Johnson vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon