Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 10TH VAISAKHA, 1941 Bail Appl..No. 2850 of 2019 CRIME NO. 252/2019 OF CHENGANNOOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/S:
AKHIL, AGED 23 YEARS S/O. PRASANNAN, KAPPIMALA THEKKUZHATHIL HOUSE, ANGADICKAL THEKKU CHENGANNUR, FROM ARYABHAVAN VEEDU, KARAYEKADU P.O., MULAKUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM KOCHI 682 031. OTHER PRESENT: SRI C K PRASAD-PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.04.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2969/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 10TH VAISAKHA, 1941 Bail Appl..No. 2969 of 2019 CRIME NO. 252/2019 OF CHENGANNOOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/S: LIJU C.MATHEW AGED 23 YEARS S/O. MATHEW, THONDUTHARAYIL VEEDU, MALAKARA MURI, ARANMULA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI.M.KIRANLAL SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SRI.T.S.SARATH RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682 031 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 689 121 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.04.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2850/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ..3.. -------------------------------------- Bail Appl. Nos. 2850 & 2969 of 2019 --------------------------------------
ORDER
These are applications for bail filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioners are accused 1 & 2 in Crime No. 252 of
2019 of Chengannur Police Station registered for the offence under Section 394 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case is that on 05.02.2019 at 9.45 pm, while the defacto complainant was proceeding to his house in a motor cycle, the accused persons intercepted the defacto complainant and thereafter, the first accused sprinkled chilly powder on the face of the defacto complainant and pushed him down and thereafter, they snatched away the gold chain of the defacto complainant having a weight of 8.5 sovereign worth Rs.1,80,000/-.
3. Heard both sides.
4. The petitioners were arrested on 07.02.2019 and since then, they have been in judicial custody. The petitioner in BA No. Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur. The above application was ..4..
dismissed on 01.03.2019. Subsequently, he approached this Court as per BA No.2335/2019 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2850/2019 submits that initially the investigation proceeded under Section 392 IPC and the Bail Application was dismissed as withdrawn to complete the statutory period of detention.
5. The petitioner in BA No. 2969 of 2019 filed CMP No.784
of 2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur and the same was dismissed on 01.03.2019. The petitioner approached this Court seeking regular bail as per BA No.1685 of 2019, but the same was dismissed on 13.03.2019, finding that the investigation is in the initial stage and the investigation has to be made as to whether the petitioner is involved in any other criminal case considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner. He again preferred another application seeking regular bail as BA No.2227/2019 before this Court. When the Bail Application came up for consideration on
08.04.2019, the learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the offence alleged against accused 1 & 2 is under Section 392 r/w Section 34 IPC and the petitioner as well as the other accused are entitled for statutory bail, as 60 days would be over by 08.04.2019. As stated earlier, on the said reasons, the
..5.. petitioner in BA No. 2969/2019 was constrained to withdraw the application in order to approach the jurisdictional magistrate to claim statutory bail.
6. The petitioners have moved the jurisdictional magistrate
seeking statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., but the said applications were dismissed by the learned magistrate holding that the offence alleged against both the accused is under Section 394 IPC.
7. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits
that the offence mentioned in Crime No. 252/2019 of Chengannur Police Station is under Section 394 r/w Section 34 IPC and the investigation is proceeding for the said offence only.
8. In this case, the petitioners were arrested on 07.02.2019 and they have been in judicial custody since then.
Considering the fact that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for a considerable period, this Court is of the view that bail can be extended to the petitioners on stringent conditions. Having considered these facts, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners herein subject to the following conditions:-
(i) Petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum to the ..6.. satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioners, either parents or siblings.
(ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Mondays and Thursdays for a period of three months after being released on bail.
(iii) They shall not threaten, coerce or intimidate the de facto complainant and the witnesses nor shall they interfere in the process of investigation.
iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passport in the Magistrate's court/jurisdictional court concerned within three days of their release on bail. If they do not possess any passport, they shall file an affidavit to that effect in that court within that period. v) The petitioners shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the jurisdictional court concerned. vi) The petitioners shall not enter into the limits of the Chengannur Police Station for a period of three months, except for investigation purpose. ..7.. vi) If the petitioners violate any of the conditions of bail, it is open to the Court having jurisdiction over the case to cancel their bail without any further orders from this Court but in accordance with law. The Bail Applications are allowed as above. Sd/- N.ANIL KUMAR JUDGE Bka//30.04.2019