HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
RAJEESH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./10194/2022
Bail - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - The court granted bail considering the duration of detention and the absence of trial commencement, emphasizing prevention of pre-conviction punishment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after being accused of murder, robbery, and evidence tampering. The petitioner had been in custody since November 2022.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail despite serious allegations and potential witness tampering.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that extended detention without trial could constitute pre-conviction punishment, justifying bail under certain conditions.
Final Decision: Bail granted with specific conditions.
ORDER
This is an application seeking regular bail filed under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973.
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.870/2021 of Mannar Police Station, Alappuzha District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under sections 302, 397 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 1860.
3. According to the prosecution, petitioner murdered the deceased after committing theft of the gold earrings and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Sri.Vishnu Bhuvanendran, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the entire prosecution allegations are false and the incident as alleged had not occurred. It was further submitted that petitioner was arrested on 10.11.2022 and he has been in custody since then. It was also pointed out that no purpose would be achieved by continuing the detention of the petitioner.
5. Sri.K.A.Noushad , learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and even though the case is now pending trial as S.C.No.512/2021 before the Sessions Court, Mavelikkara, there is every chance that the petitioner may intimidate/influence the witnesses.
6. I have considered the rival contentions.
7. Even though I have rejected the bail application of the petitioner on 24.06.2022, considering the period of detention already undergone and also the fact that the trial has not yet started, I am of the view that the continued detention, may amount to punishment of the petitioner before conviction.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:-
(a) Petitioner shall be released on bail on him executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction.
(b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the trial of the case.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 10194/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure -I CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.870/2021 OF MANNAR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT DATED 28.11.2021.
Annexure-II TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.870/2021 OF MANNAR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.
Annexure-III TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN B.A NO. 4484/2022 DATED 24.06.2022.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.