Back
2023 Supreme(Bom) 1893
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
M.S. Karnik, J.
Kingsley Fernandes - Appellant
Versus
State of Goa - Respondent
Criminal Application (Bail) No. 238 of 2023(Filing)
Decided On : 11-04-2023
Arun De Sa, Advocate, Sahil Sardessai, Advocate, Alphy Dsouza, Advocate, Nikhil Vaze, Advocate
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that bail can be granted even in serious cases if the accused has no prior criminal history and if appropriate conditions can be imposed to mitigate risks.
Headnote:
BAIL - CRIMINAL OFFENCES - The court granted bail to the applicant despite serious allegations, emphasizing the absence of criminal antecedents and the nature of injuries sustained by the complainant. The court imposed stringent conditions to mitigate potential risks, reflecting a balanced approach to the rights of the accused and the safety of the complainant.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested for serious offences under the IPC and the Arms Act after allegedly assaulting the complainant with a group of individuals. The complainant suffered simple injuries, and the applicant was identified as one of the assailants during a test identification parade.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the absence of prior criminal records for the applicant and the nature of the injuries sustained by the complainant. It concluded that the applicant could be released on bail with stringent conditions to ensure safety and cooperation with the investigation.
Issues: Whether the applicant should be granted bail considering the serious nature of the allegations and the potential risk to the complainant and others involved.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the seriousness of the allegations does not automatically preclude bail, especially in the absence of prior criminal history and given the nature of the injuries. The imposition of strict conditions was deemed sufficient to address concerns regarding the applicant's potential actions.
Final Decision: The application for bail was granted with specific conditions to ensure the safety of the complainant and the integrity of the investigation.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
1. This is an application for bail. The applicant was arrested on 8/3/2023 at 03:25hrs for offence punishable under Ss. 143, 144, 148, 323, 342, 307 read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code and Sec. 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, by the Quepem Police Station in respect of Crime No.24/2023. The complainant is one Shri Prajyot, son of Prakash Naik. It is alleged that on 7/3/2023 at around 10:00PM, six accused including the applicant, in furtherance of their common object formed unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons/arms such as sword, knife and baseball stick, assaulted the complainant with fist blows, kicks and knife causing him simple injuries and confined the complainant in a Swift car and further, when the complainant tried to escape from the car, they attempted to kill the complainant by attacking the complainant with sword on the head, however, the complainant dodged the attack and saved himself. The medical report reveals that the complainant suffered simple injuries. All the six accused were arrested on 8/3/2023. The cars which were used in the commission of the crime were attached under the Panchnama, so also the weapons used, i.e. 3 big swords, 1 baseball bat, 2 knives, which were in the car were attached under the Panchanama. The statement of the witnesses have been recorded which, according to the prosecution, corroborated with the facts mentioned by the complainant. The test identification parade of the accused persons was held. The applicant was identified by the complainant to be the one who assaulted him.
2. The reply has been filed by the prosecution. From the reply it appears that there was an accident in the morning on 7/3/2023 pursuant to which there were heated arguments between the applicant and one Sachin who was also celebrating Holi at Cotta, Amona. After the arguments, the applicant left the spot. It is alleged that to take revenge, the applicant contacted and gathered five known history-sheeters who were not locals of Quepem to assault and harm Sachin. The accused inquired the whereabouts of Sachin from the complainant-Prajyot. When Prajyot did not give details of Sachin, they assaulted Prajyot. It is submitted that offence is of a serious nature and it is the applicant who had gathered the known history-sheeters who all assaulted the complainant in furtherance of their common intention. It is submitted that there is every possibility that the applicant may make another attempt to get even with Sachin.
3. There are no criminal antecedents against the applicant. The statements of the witnesses have been recorded and even the weapons have been seized. The applicant is in custody since 8/3/2023. The complainant suffered simple injuries. Considering the nature of the allegations, the applicant can be released on bail. To allay the apprehension of learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the applicant may cause harm to the complainant or to Sachin, I propose to impose stringent conditions while releasing the applicant on bail. Hence, the following Order:
<WXY>ORDER
(i) The applicant is released on bail in respect of Crime No.24/2023 registered with the Quepem Police Station upon furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000.00 with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
(ii) The Applicant shall not enter the area of area of South Goa District till further orders of the trial Court.
(iii) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and report to the Investigating Officer as and when called.
(iv) The applicant shall furnish his residential address and contact details to the Investigating Officer.
(v) The applicant shall not leave the State of Goa without the permission of the Investigating Officer.
(vi) The applicant shall report to the Panaji Police Station once a week between 11:00AM to 01:00PM on every Saturday till the filing of the charge-sheet.</WXY>
4. The Application is disposed of.
