Brijith Babu Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1126015
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnFeb-10-2014
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN
AppellantBrijith Babu
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice n.k.balakrishnan monday,the10h day of february201421st magha, 1935 bail appl..no. 8745 of 2013 (e) ------------------------------- against the order in crmc24512013 of sessions court,thrissur dated0312-2013 crime no. 1004/2013 of athirappilly police station , trissur accused(s)/petitioners/ 2nd accused: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- brijith babu, aged22years s/o babu k.v, kannanplayathu house, vishery desom pariyaram village, thrissur district by adv. sri.c.v.manuvilsan complainant(s)/respondent/ complainant: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ state of kerala, represented by the sub inspector of police athirappilly police station represented by the public prosecutor high court of kerala, ernakulam68203 by public prosecutor sri.dhanesh mathew manjooran this bail application having come up for admission on1002-2014, the court on the same day passed the following: jjj n.k. balakrishnan, j.------------------------------------------ b.a. no. 8745 of 2013 ------------------------------------------ dated this the 10th day of february, 2014 order the petitioner is the 2nd accused in crime no.1004/2013 of athirappilly police station, thrissur district. offences alleged are under sections 324, 326, 308 and 354b r/w 34 of ipc.2. the petitioner is the son of the 1st accused. the allegation is that on 11.09.2013 at 3.45 pm the accused in furtherance of the common intention attacked the defacto complainant; a1 inflicted series of injuries to the defacto complainant with dangerous weapon, causing fracture to the lateral malleolus left. other injuries were also caused.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1st accused was remanded for so many days and thereafter he was released on bail. there is no specific b.a. no. 8745/2013 -2- allegation that the petitioner herein did any overt act against the complainant or her husband. it is further submitted that, in fact, a crime was registered as crime no.1356/2013 against the complainant alleging commission of offences under sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 452 and 506(1) r/w 34 of ipc alleging that the petitioner's father was attacked by the complainant and others and only very minor injury - aberration of 2 x 0.2 and 0.2 x 0.5 cm on the root of nose, was found. investigating agency found that the allegations in that crime are false. it is pointed out that the main allegation was against the father (a1) and he was in custody for quite long time.4. considering all the aspects the following directions are issued: the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer within seven days from today. after interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned b.a. no. 8745/2013 -3- magistrate. when applied for bail by the accused, the learned magistrate will, considering the nature of the case, grant bail to the petitioner but on the following conditions: a. the petitioner shall execute a bond for rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate. if in case the magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties. b. the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer and shall appear before the investigating officer on all mondays and fridays between 9.30 am to 11.30 am until further orders. b.a. no. 8745/2013 -4- c. the petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the learned jurisdictional magistrate. if he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the magistrate. d. the petitioner will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. e. the petitioner shall not leave the state of kerala without the prior permission of the learned magistrate. b.a. no. 8745/2013 -5- f. the learned magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/driving licence etc. sd/- n.k. balakrishnan, judge //true copy// p.a. to judge jjj
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN MONDAY,THE10H DAY OF FEBRUARY201421ST MAGHA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 8745 of 2013 (E) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN CRMC24512013 of SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR DATED0312-2013 CRIME NO. 1004/2013 OF ATHIRAPPILLY POLICE STATION , TRISSUR ACCUSED(S)/PETITIONERS/ 2ND ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BRIJITH BABU, AGED22YEARS S/O BABU K.V, KANNANPLAYATHU HOUSE, VISHERY DESOM PARIYARAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN COMPLAINANT(S)/RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ATHIRAPPILLY POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM68203 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.DHANESH MATHEW MANJOORAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1002-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

------------------------------------------ B.A. No. 8745 of 2013 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of February, 2014 ORDER

The petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1004/2013 of Athirappilly Police Station, Thrissur District. Offences alleged are under sections 324, 326, 308 and 354B r/w 34 of IPC.

2. The petitioner is the son of the 1st accused. The allegation is that on 11.09.2013 at 3.45 pm the accused in furtherance of the common intention attacked the defacto complainant; A1 inflicted series of injuries to the defacto complainant with dangerous weapon, causing fracture to the lateral malleolus left. Other injuries were also caused.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1st accused was remanded for so many days and thereafter he was released on bail. There is no specific B.A. No. 8745/2013 -2- allegation that the petitioner herein did any overt act against the complainant or her husband. It is further submitted that, in fact, a crime was registered as Crime No.1356/2013 against the complainant alleging commission of offences under sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 452 and 506(1) r/w 34 of IPC alleging that the petitioner's father was attacked by the complainant and others and only very minor injury - aberration of 2 x 0.2 and 0.2 x 0.5 cm on the root of nose, was found. Investigating agency found that the allegations in that crime are false. It is pointed out that the main allegation was against the father (A1) and he was in custody for quite long time.

4. Considering all the aspects the following directions are issued: The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today. After interrogation the accused shall be produced before the learned B.A. No. 8745/2013 -3- Magistrate. When applied for bail by the accused, the learned Magistrate will, considering the nature of the case, grant bail to the petitioner but on the following conditions: a. The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. If in case the Magistrate has any doubt about the genuineness or correctness of the tax receipts produced by the sureties, the learned Magistrate can insist for production of the attested photo copies of the original title deeds of the sureties. b. The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 9.30 AM to 11.30 AM until further orders. B.A. No. 8745/2013 -4- c. The petitioner shall surrender his original passport before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate. If he is not having any valid passport, he should file an affidavit regarding the same before the Magistrate. d. The petitioner will also file an affidavit that he will abide by all the conditions as mentioned above and that he will not commit any offence similar to the offence involved in this case and will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. e. The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. B.A. No. 8745/2013 -5- f. The learned Magistrate will also ensure the identity of the sureties by insisting production of electoral photo identity cards/Driving licence etc. Sd/- N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj