Gangadharan thekkekkara Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY,THE27H DAY OF MAY20146TH JYAISHTA, 1936 Bail Appl..No. 3444 of 2014 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 316/2014 OF BEKAL POLICE STATION , KASARGOD -------- PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED : ---------------------------------------- GANGADHARAN, THEKKEKKARA, AGED34YEARS S/O. KUNHIRAMAN, THEKKEKKARA, UDUMA VILLAGE HOSDURG TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT/STATE : --------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING SHO BEKAL POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2705-2014 ALONG WITH BA34452014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BP THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J --------------------------------------- B.A.Nos.3444 & 3445 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2014 ORDER

First of these application is filed by the second accused while the second one is filed by the accused 1 and 3 in Crime No.316 of 2014 of the Bekal Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 307 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused 1 and 3 are in custody from 19.04.2014 while the second accused is in custody from 25.04.2014. They seek bail.

2. Applications are opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is submitted that on 17.04.2014 at about 09.30 p.m these accused assaulted the de facto complainant with knife and inflicted deep injury on the stomach.

3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true at any rate, the weapon is recovered and further custody of these accused is not required.

4. I have gone through the wound certificate of the victim and find that he suffered deep stab wound which even perforated some of the internal organs. Having regard to the nature of injuries and the weapon used, the request of the first accused for bail cannot be allowed at this stage.

5. So far as accused 2 and 3 are concerned, having B.A.Nos.3444 & 3445 of 2014 2 regard to the role attributed to them and since they are not reported to be involved in any other case from Bekal Police Station, I am inclined to grant bail but subject to stringent conditions. Applications are disposed of as under: (I) Request of the first accused in Crime No.316 of 2014 of the Bekal Police Station for bail is rejected leaving it open to him to move again after the investigation has progressed. (II) (i) Accused 2 and 3 are granted bail in Crime No.316 of 2014 of the Bekal Police Station and shall be released on bail, (if not required to be detained otherwise) on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional magistrate and subject to the following conditions: (a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of any of the accused 2 and 3. (b) Accused 2 and 3 shall report to the officer investigating the case on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m and 12.00 p.m for a period of two months or until filing of the final report whichever is earlier. B.A.Nos.3444 & 3445 of 2014 3 (c) Accused 2 and 3 shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation. (d) Accused 2 and 3 shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail. (e) Accused 2 and 3 shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses. (ii) It is made clear that in case any of condition Nos. (b) to (e) is violated, it is open to the Investigating Officer to seek cancellation of the bail granted hereby by moving application before the learned magistrate (until committal of the case if any, and thereafter, before the learned Principal Sessions Judge concerned) as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR2006Supreme Court 100). Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. AS /True Copy/ P.A. to Judge