The degree of involvement and nature of alleged offences are crucial for granting pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

ORDER

This is an application seeking pre-arrest bail filed under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973.

2. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.206/2022 of Devikulam Police Station, Idukki District. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294 (b), 323, 324 and 326 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code , 1860.

3. According to the prosecution, on 01.05.2022, the accused abused and assaulted their father with an iron rod causing fracture of the left patella and also assaulted his paramour with an iron rod and thereby committed the offences alleged.

4. Sri.George Mathew, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the prosecution allegations are false and that petitioners have no involvement in the offence. It was further submitted that even going by the prosecution allegations, the role of the 2nd petitioner is minimal and the specific overt act resulting in the fracture is allegedly committed by the 1st accused, who has already been arrested and released on bail.

5. Sri.K.A.Noushad, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the grant of bail and contended that the allegation against the 2nd petitioner are serious and that custodial interrogation is essential in the circumstances.

6. Since it was already submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the 1st petitioner was arrested, and released on bail, this application as far as the 1st petitioner is concerned has become infructuous.

7. On a perusal of the allegations in the FIR, it is noticed that the overt act alleged against the 2nd petitioner is not the reason for the fracture. Section 326 of IPC is the only offence, which is non-bailable and the specific overt act alleged for that injury is against the 1st petitioner.

8. Having regard to the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the view that the 2nd petitioner can be released on bail. Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:

(a) Second petitioner shall appear before the Investigating OfÏcer on 04.11.2022 at 9.00 am and shall subject himself to interrogation.

(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating OfÏcer proposes to arrest the second petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before the Investigating OfÏcer.

(c) Second petitioner shall appear before the Investigating OfÏcer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the investigation.

(d) Second petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.

(e) Second petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he is on bail.

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. 8046/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20.09.2022 IN CRL.M.C. NO.722/2022 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA