SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 676

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
 
Naseer, s/o. Musthafa - Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala - Respondents
Bail Appl. no. 9784 of 2024
Decided on : 14-03-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BY ADVS. E.A.HARIS SUNNY MATHEW M.A.AHAMMAD SAHEER MUHAMMED YASIL FATHIMA SHERIN
For the Respondent:BY ADVS. ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION(AG-11) SRI G SUDHEER, PP

IMPORTANT POINT
The principle that 'bail is the rule and jail is the exception' is reinforced, emphasizing the need for timely trials and the protection of personal liberty under Article 21.

Headnote:

(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 483 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 341, 302, 120B, 201, 212, 109, 118, 465, 471, and 149 - Arms Act - Section 27(3) - Bail application filed by the accused in a pending murder case - The petitioner has been in custody for over three years without trial, with no criminal antecedents - The trial is scheduled to commence on 05.05.2025, and the petitioner is granted bail subject to conditions including not entering the district except for court appearances. (Paras 2 , 6 , 11 )

(B) Bail - The principle that 'bail is the rule and jail is the exception' is reaffirmed - Courts must consider the merits of the bail application without undue hesitation, even in serious allegations. (Paras 8 - 10 )

Facts of the case:

The petitioner is accused in a murder case stemming from a politically motivated attack, arrested on 23.12.2021, and has been in custody since then.

Findings of Court:

The petitioner,s prolonged detention without trial is noted, and bail is granted with conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner should be granted bail given the length of custody and the status of the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of personal liberty under Article 21 and that bail should be granted unless there are compelling reasons against it.

Result: Bail application allowed.

ORDER :

This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita .

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1989/2021 of Palakkad Town South Police Station, which is now pending as S.C.No.662/2022 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-I, Palakkad. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section s 143, 144,147, 148, 341, 302, 120B, 201, 212, 109, 118 , 465 and 471 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(3) read with Section 7(a) (b) of the Arms Act .

3. The prosecution case is that, on 15.11.2021 at about 8.45 P.M. due to political animosity, one Sanjith, a worker of Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) was attacked by the accused Nos. 1 to 5 with swords and sticks, while he was travelling along with his wife. Due to the injuries inflicted upon the body of the said Sanjith, he died. The crime was initially registered against the five accused persons and during the course of investigation, the petitioner was also implicated as an accused alleging conspiracy. The petitioner was arrested on 23.12.2021. The petitioner is in custody from that day onwards.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.

5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody for about 3½ years and the trial in this case is not even started. The counsel submitted that there is no criminal antecedent to the petitioner and the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant him bail. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner is the main conspirator; he is the Secretary of Popular Front of India in that area. The Public Prosecutor also submitted that it is an incident happened in continuation with several other incidents, and if the petitioner is released on bail, he will commit similar offence in future also.

6. This Court considered the contention of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is a fact that the petitioner is in custody from 23.12.2021. Now three years and three months is already over. This Court directed the Registry to get a report from the trial court about the present stage of the case. The First Additional District Court, Palakkad submitted a detailed report, which is extracted hereunder:

“In connection with the above, I am submitting the following report:-

At present, 210 Sessions Cases and 120 OA cases filed u/s. 10 of Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act- 2003 are pending before this Court. Out of 210 Sessions Cases, 9 cases are murder cases and 6 cases are under the POCSO Act. Trial in murder cases has already commenced. Other Sessions Cases are also taken up for evidence. Bail applications arising in crime under POCSO Act are also dealt with by this Court.

At present as there is direction by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala to dispose of SC 903/2022 which is a case in connection with the murder of one Muhammed Subair within a time span, that case is given preference. In the said case there are 169 witnesses out of which up to 130 witnesses are so far summoned. Out of 130 witnesses summoned, some witnesses are given up by the Special Public Prosecutor in that case. Trial in that case is not completed as remaining witnesses are to be examined.

Actually in SC 662/2022 regarding which report is called, after hearing on the framing of charge on 21.07.2023 it was noticed that three other cases numbered SC 1064/2022, SC 121/2023 and SC 488/2023 which are pending before this Court were in connection with the same crime and so the said cases were clubbed with the above case and thereafter on 08.12.2023 charge was framed read over and explained to the accused and they pleaded not guilty. Thereafter the case could not be scheduled for trial as the properties sent to the Forensic Laboratory were not returned. At present the properties and the chemical examination report are received from the laboratory.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top