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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 63379

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
BABU V. ALIAS SAMBALAM BABU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./4918/2022



A lack of prior criminal antecedents and prolonged custody can justify the granting of bail, even in serious criminal cases.

Headnote:

Bail - Criminal Offences - IPC Sections 324 and 308 - The court granted bail to the accused, considering the absence of prior criminal records and the imprisonment duration, while imposing specific conditions to mitigate risks associated with bail.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner is accused in a case alleging grievous assault under IPC for attempting to stab a victim during an altercation, leading to severe injuries.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering the serious nature of the allegations and his conduct while in custody.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the absence of prior criminal record and the significant period of custody were compelling reasons to grant bail, subject to strict conditions.

Final Decision: The court granted bail to the petitioner with stringent conditions.

ORDER

This is an application for regular bail.

2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.443 of 2022 of Infopark Police Station, Ernakulam District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 324 and 308 of IPC .

3. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that, out of an altercation in between the husband of the defacto complainant and the accused and on account of that enmity on 19.6.2022 at 12.30 pm in the sit-out of the victim's home at Kakkanad, the accused tried to stab on the neck of the victim with a knife, when the victim tried to prevent the said attempt, he sustained a deep injury on his right hand and thereafter the accused stabbed on his right thigh and caused injury.

4. Petitioner contended that he has been falsely implicated in the above said crime and he is in custody from 26.6.2022 onwards. Petitioner submits that he has no other criminal antecedents.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for bail mainly contended that the injury sustained by the defacto complainant are severe, but submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents.

7. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody from 26.6.2022 onwards, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail on the following stringent conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like-sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court;

(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.443 of 2022 of Infopark Police Station, on every Saturday at 11 am until filing of final report;

(iii) The petitioner shall not attempt to interfere with the investigation or to influence any witness in Crime No. 443 of

2022 of Infopark Police Station;

(iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.

If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the investigating officer in Crime No. 443 of 2022 of Infopark Police Station may file an application before the jurisdictional court, for cancellation of bail.

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 Back to top