P.P.Liju Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1096371
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnNov-04-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
AppellantP.P.Liju
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice thomas p.joseph monday, the4h day of november201313th karthika, 1935 bail appl..no. 7308 of 2013 () ------------------------------- crime no. 729/2013 of kuthiyathode police station , alappuzha petitioner/accused: ------------------- p.p.liju aged36years s/o.parameswaran, puthumanasseril, kodamthuruth kuthiyathode p.o. by advs.sri.k.gopalakrishna kurup (sr.) sri.s.manu respondent: ----------- state of kerala represented by the public prosecutor high court of kerala, ernakulam-31. by public prosecutor: adv sreejith this bail application having come up for admission on0411-2013, the court on the same day passed the following: thomas p.joseph, j.========================= b.a.no.7308 of 2013 ============================ dated this the 04th day of november, 2013 order petitioner is accused, in crime no.279 of 2013 of the kuthiyanthode police station for the offences punishable under secs.323 and 326 of the indian penal code, apprehends arrest and has filed this application.2. according to the prosecution, on 16.09.2013 at about 4 p.m while the de facto complainant was watching the snake boat race petitioners assaulted him with a sword stick.3. learned public prosecutor while opposing the application has submitted that the sword stick is not so far recovered.4. learned senior advocate submits that on the same day, time and place, the de facto complainant and others attacked the petitioner (who was sitting in a country boat) with a sword stick and the police registered crime no.723 of 2013 for the offences punishable under sec323, 324, 341 and 308 of the indian penal code. it is submitted that learned sessions judge, alappuzha has rejected the application for pre-arrest bail made by the petitioner observing that injuries suffered by the petitioner are minor when b.a.no.7308 of 2013 2 compared to the injury suffered by the de facto complainant (accused in crime no.723 of 2013) but, the said observation of the learned sessions judge is not true.5. i have given a copy of the discharge certificate of the petitioner and the copy of the wound certificate of the de facto complainant.6. it is revealed from the discharge certificate of the petitioner that he suffered lacerated wound on the left thigh, over the left palm (over the dorsal aspect), left palm, pulmar aspect and multiple abrasion over the left thigh, right and left palm and anterior abdominal wall.7. copy of the wound certificate of the de facto complainant (crime no.729 of 2013 and accused in crime no.723 of 2013) shows that he suffered injury on the right big finger split from the rest of the hand, metacarpel vertically split and flexor tendon cut.8. it appears that there was a scuffle between the two at the place of occurrence. who is the aggressor is a matter which the trial court has to decide. as the materials now disclosed, it appears that on the side of the petitioner, he was alone while on the side of the de facto complainant, there were three. b.a.no.7308 of 2013 3 9. having regard to the fact situation and considering the nature of offences attributed to the parties, i am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but subject to conditions. resultantly this application is disposed of as under: (i) petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating crime no.729 of 2013 of kuthiyanthode police station on 11.11.2013 at 10 a.m for interrogation. (ii) in case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply. (ii) in case of arrest, petitioner shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (iii) on such production, petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for `25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions: (a) petitioner shall report to the officer investigating crime no.729 of 2013 of the kuthiyathode police station on every saturday between 10a.m and 12p.m for a period of two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. b.a.no.7308 of 2013 4 (b) petitioner shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for interrogation at all reasonable time and place. (c) petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (d) one of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. (e) petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail. (f) petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses in the case. (g) in case the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, it is open to the investigating officer to move the jurisdictional magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in p.k shaji vs. state of kerala (air2006sc100. sd/- thomas p.joseph, judge. sbna true copy p a to judge
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE4H DAY OF NOVEMBER201313TH KARTHIKA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 7308 of 2013 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 729/2013 OF KUTHIYATHODE POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------- P.P.LIJU AGED36YEARS S/O.PARAMESWARAN, PUTHUMANASSERIL, KODAMTHURUTH KUTHIYATHODE P.O. BY ADVS.SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP (SR.) SRI.S.MANU RESPONDENT: ----------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV SREEJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0411-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

========================= B.A.No.7308 of 2013 ============================ Dated this the 04th day of November, 2013 ORDER

Petitioner is accused, in Crime No.279 of 2013 of the Kuthiyanthode Police Station for the offences punishable under Secs.323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed this application.

2. According to the prosecution, on 16.09.2013 at about 4 p.m while the de facto complainant was watching the snake boat race petitioners assaulted him with a sword stick.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor while opposing the application has submitted that the sword stick is not so far recovered.

4. Learned Senior Advocate submits that on the same day, time and place, the de facto complainant and others attacked the petitioner (who was sitting in a country boat) with a sword stick and the police registered Crime No.723 of 2013 for the offences punishable under Sec323, 324, 341 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted that learned Sessions Judge, Alappuzha has rejected the application for pre-arrest bail made by the petitioner observing that injuries suffered by the petitioner are minor when B.A.No.7308 of 2013 2 compared to the injury suffered by the de facto complainant (accused in Crime No.723 of 2013) but, the said observation of the learned Sessions Judge is not true.

5. I have given a copy of the discharge certificate of the petitioner and the copy of the wound certificate of the de facto complainant.

6. It is revealed from the discharge certificate of the petitioner that he suffered lacerated wound on the left thigh, over the left palm (over the dorsal aspect), left palm, pulmar aspect and multiple abrasion over the left thigh, right and left palm and anterior abdominal wall.

7. Copy of the wound certificate of the de facto complainant (Crime No.729 of 2013 and accused in Crime No.723 of 2013) shows that he suffered injury on the right big finger split from the rest of the hand, metacarpel vertically split and flexor tendon cut.

8. It appears that there was a scuffle between the two at the place of occurrence. Who is the aggressor is a matter which the trial court has to decide. As the materials now disclosed, it appears that on the side of the petitioner, he was alone while on the side of the de facto complainant, there were three. B.A.No.7308 of 2013 3 9. Having regard to the fact situation and considering the nature of offences attributed to the parties, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner but subject to conditions. Resultantly this application is disposed of as under: (i) Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.729 of 2013 of Kuthiyanthode Police Station on 11.11.2013 at 10 a.m for interrogation. (ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply. (ii) In case of arrest, petitioner shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day. (iii) On such production, petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for `25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions: (a) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating Crime No.729 of 2013 of the Kuthiyathode Police Station on every Saturday between 10a.m and 12p.m for a period of two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier. B.A.No.7308 of 2013 4 (b) Petitioner shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for interrogation at all reasonable time and place. (c) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case. (d) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner. (e) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail. (f) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses in the case. (g) In case the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, it is open to the investigating officer to move the jurisdictional magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K Shaji Vs. State of Kerala (AIR2006SC100. Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. Sbna True Copy P A to Judge