IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl No. 12 of 2008()
1. RAJEEV @ KOCHUNADA RAJI, S/O. NADARAJAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :11/01/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
B.A. Nos. 12, 83 and 284 OF 2008
````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 11th day of January, 2008
O R D E R
These applications are filed by the accused
persons in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter
alia, under Sections 326 and 308 read with 149 IPC.
B.A.No.83/08 is one for regular bail filed by the 2nd accused.
B.A.Nos.12 and 284 of 2008 are applications for anticipatory
bail filed by accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6. The 2nd accused was
arrested and continues in custody from 8.12.07. The alleged
incident took place on the night of 17.11.07. The crux of the
allegations is that a group of six persons armed with
dangerous weapons had attacked the de facto
complainant/informant. In the F.I. Statement, the de facto
complainant alleged that one person described as the son of
Vikraman Mooper and five others had attacked him. Political
animosity is the alleged motive stated in the FIR. Later, in the
course of investigation, when the said son of Vikraman
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 2 :
Mooper was traced, the de facto complainant took the stand
that he was not the person who attacked him. Later, the
prosecution apprehended accused Nos.2 and 5. They were
arrested. Accused No.5 has already been granted regular
bail by the Sessions Court. The 2nd accused has come to this
Court seeking regular bail.
2. It is the case of the prosecution now that the
present 1st accused had engaged accused Nos.2 to 8 to
mount an attack on the de facto complainant. The learned
counsel for the first accused submits that the 1st accused had
no motive ever against the de facto complainant, the victim.
In these circumstances, the entire allegations may be held to
be not justified, submits the learned counsel for the
petitioners.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners further
submit that the allegations under Sections 326 and 308 IPC
are both not justified by the allegations in this case or the
nature of injuries suffered. The inclusion of these allegations
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 3 :
clearly show that vexation is the motive.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the
applications for anticipatory bail but does not oppose the
application for regular bail. Appropriate conditions may be
imposed, it is prayed.
5. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I am
satisfied that regular bail can be granted to the 2nd accused
subject to appropriate terms and conditions.
6. Coming to the applications for anticipatory bail, the
learned Public Prosecutor was requested to pointedly bring to
the notice of this Court any material to show that the 1st
accused has any animosity against the de facto complainant
as to justify his engaging accused Nos.2 to 8 to unleash an
attack on the victim. The learned Public Prosecutor after
perusal of the case diary shows that though the de facto
complainant’s statement has been recorded on three
occasions by now, there is no mention of any animosity
between him and the 1st accused. But the learned Public
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 4 :
Prosecutor points out that one of the arrested accused had
stated that there was such animosity and it is because of such
animosity that accused Nos.2 to 8 were engaged to attack the
victim. It is of crucial relevance to note that eventhough the
victim has been questioned many times thereafter, his version
on this aspect has not been cross checked or recorded
admittedly.
7. The allegation under Section 326 IPC is not
justified and is not pressed, submits the learned Public
Prosecutor. No grievous hurt under Section 320 IPC is shown
to have been suffered by the victim.
8. My attention has been drawn to the wound
certificate showing the nature of injuries suffered by the
victim. The totality of circumstances do persuade me to agree
with the learned counsel for the petitioners that sufficient and
satisfactorily allegations justifying the inclusion of the offence
under Section 308 IPC are not shown to insist. I am, in these
circumstances, satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 5 :
to the other accused persons subject to appropriate terms
and conditions.
9. In the result :-
(a) B.A.83/08 is allowed. The petitioner/2nd accused
shall be released on bail on the following terms and
conditions:
i) The petitioner(A2) shall execute a bond for
Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent
sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned
Magistrate.
ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation before the investigating officer between 10 a.m
and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays, for a period of two
months from the date of his release and thereafter as and
when directed by the investigating officer in writing to do so.
(b) B.A.Nos.12/08 and 284/08 are allowed. Following
directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C in favour of
the petitioners(accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6 ).
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 6 :
i) Petitioners(accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6) shall
surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at
11 a.m on 18.1.08. They shall be released on regular bail on
condition that they execute bonds for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees
twenty five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each
for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate.
ii) The petitioners(accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6) shall
make themselves available for interrogation before the
investigating officer between 10 a.m and 5 p.m on 21.1.08
and 22.1.08. During this period, the investigators shall be at
liberty to interrogate the said petitioners in custody and take
all necessary steps in the proper conduct of the investigation.
iii) Thereafter they shall make themselves available for
interrogation before the investigating officer on all Mondays
and Fridays between 10 a.m and 12 noon for a period of two
months. Subsequently the petitioners(accused Nos.1, 3, 4
and 6) shall so appear as and when directed by the
investigating officer in writing to do so.
BA.12/08 & connected cases
: 7 :
(iv) If the petitioners(accused Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6) do not
appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i),
directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and
the police shall be at liberty to arrest the said petitioners and
deal with them in accordance with law, as if these directions
were not issued at all.
(v) If they were arrested prior to 18.1.08, they shall be
released from custody on their executing a bond for
Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) without any
sureties, undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate
on 18.1.08.
10. Hand over copy of this order to the learned counsel
for the petitioner.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
aks