Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MARY JOSEPH, J
A.R. SHAJI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.A 905 2021
Bail - Lifting Conditions - IPC, Kerala Police Act, SC/ST Act - The court lifted a restrictive bail condition limiting the petitioner’s movement, interpreting it as an undue curtailment of freedom despite ongoing investigations.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant sought to lift a bail condition that restricted his presence in a specific area due to allegations under various sections including the IPC and SC/ST Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court agreed that the bail condition was likely to cause prejudice and hinder the petitioner's freedom, especially in light of the ongoing investigation.
Issues: Whether the restrictive bail condition imposed on the petitioner should be lifted.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the bail condition was excessive and unjust, hindering the petitioner's rights while allowing further investigation.
Final Decision: Condition No.3 is lifted from the bail order.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 28th day of March, 2022 In this appeal, lifting of condition No.3 imposed in the order granting bail to the appellant is sought.
2. The copy of the order granting bail is produced as Annexure 2 and condition No.3 of it reads:
“3. Petitioner shall remove himself from the neighborhood of the defacto complainant and shall not enter the limits of Edakochi, other than for attending investigation demands.”
The offences alleged against the petitioner were punishable under Sections 294 (b) of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘ IPC ’), 119(a) of Kerala Police Act , 1960 and Section 3 (1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST Act’). Petitioner was arrested on 10.11.2021 and granted bail on the same day. Five conditions were imposed among which the 3rd one was that the petitioner shall remove himself from the neighborhood of the defacto complainant and shall not enter the limits of Edakochi, other than for attending investigation demands. Condition No.3 is liable to cause prejudice to the petitioner and is of the nature of curtailing his freedom evenafter granting bail to him.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has also submitted that further investigation was ordered in the case after submission of the final report under Section 173 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C’) and thereafter a report was filed under Section 173 (8) of Cr.P.C. In the above circumstances, Condition No.3 is only liable to be lifted.
In the result, appeal stands allowed and Condition No.3 is lifted from Annexure 2 order.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH JUDGE
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 905/2021 APPELLANT’S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/06/2016 IN CRL.M.C.NO.1172/2016 ON THE FILES OF HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM.
ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/11/2021 IN CRL.M.P.NO.3094/2021 IN CRIME NO.997/2016 OF PALLURUTHY POLICE STATION ON THE FILES OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KOCHI.
ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE KOCHI TALUK MEETING OF THE AKHILA KERALA DHEEVARA SABHA.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 798/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
31.12.2018.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. NO.174/2019 ALONG WITH THE F.I. STATEMENT DATED 14.2.2019 OF KANAKAKUNNU POLICE STATION.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE SC/ST COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 27.6.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.11.2019 OF THE SC/ST COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED
22.11.2018.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR PROPERT INVESTIGATION DATED 6.11.2019.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
09/06/2020.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
