Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 38577
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
BALU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./10540/2022
M.R.SASITH, NIMA JACOB
The court can grant bail if further detention is unwarranted, balancing the seriousness of the charges against the petitioner's rights.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Procedure - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 439 - The court discussed the legal framework for granting bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences and the necessity for conditions to prevent interference with the investigation, ultimately deciding in favor of bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused in a criminal case, allegedly committed trespass and attempted murder due to previous enmity, but contended that he was falsely implicated without evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had been in custody for an extended period and deemed that further detention was unnecessary given the nature of the offences and the progress of the investigation.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail despite the serious nature of the offences.
Ratio Decidendi: Bail can be granted when further detention is unnecessary and appropriate conditions can be imposed to mitigate risks associated with release.
Final Decision: The bail application is allowed, and the petitioner is granted bail under specific conditions.
ORDER
This is an application for bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 .
2. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.1709 of 2022 of Karunagappally Police Station. He allegedly had committed the offences punishable under Sections 447, 294(b), 324 and 308 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. The prosecution allegation is that, on 16.12.2022, at 11.30 PM, the accused, due to some previous enmity towards the de facto complainant, trespassed into her residential compound and used abusive language against her husband. The petitioner tried to stab with a sword on the neck of the husband of the de facto complainant. If the above attack was not warded off by the de faco complainant, it would have resulted in his death. Thus, the petitioner has committed the offences alleged against him.
5. The petitioner would contend that he did not involve in the alleged crime and without any material or evidence, he has been implicated in the crime. He is innocent. The investigation in the matter has been progressed considerably and there is no reason or justification for his further detention.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that considering the seriousness of the offence and the possibility of interfering with the investigation by the petitioner in the event of his release on bail, this petition deserve only to be dismissed.
7. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 18.12.2022. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, and considering the nature and gravity of the offence, further detention of the petitioner is unnecessary. I am therefore of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.
In the result, the bail application is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties for the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, subject to the following conditions:
(i) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;
(ii) He shall appear before the investigating officer as and when called for; and
(iii) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in any offence.
In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.
