Petitioner's right to reside must be balanced against law and order concerns; existing bail conditions sufficiently protect witnesses.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS TUESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 8107 OF 2025 CRIME NO.689/2023 OF Vazhikadavu Police Station, Malappuram AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.354 OF 2024 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - III, MANJERI / III ADDITIONAL MACT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MANJERI PETITIONER/ACCUSED :

MANOJ , AGED 47 YEARS S/O KRISHNAN, CHATHOLI HOUSE, VALLIKKKAD, VAZHIKKADAVU (P.O), MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 679333 BY ADVS.

SHRI.M.T.SAMEER SHRI.JERRY MATHEW SMT.DEVIKA K.R.

SHRI.RAVEENDRAN P.V.

SMT.SAWPARNIKA RAJU SHRI.SIYAD UMMER RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 PP.SRI.M.P.PRASANTH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

24.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

C.S.DIAS,J --------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Dated this the 24th day of February, 2026

ORDER

The petitioner is the original accused in S.C.No.354/2024 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge - III, Manjeri, (‘Trial Court’, in short) which has originated from Crime No.689/2023 registered by the Vazhikkadavu Police Station, Malappuram, alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 , (‘ IPC ’, in short).

2. The petitioner has stated in the criminal miscellaneous case that, by Annexure-1 order, the petitioner was enlarged on bail on 18.04.2024, subject to conditions. As per condition No.6, the petitioner has been directed not to enter the limits of the Vazhikadavu Police Station, till the completion of the trial. The petitioner is permanently residing within the territorial limits of the Vazhikadavu Police Station. The petitioner has been kept out of the area for the nearly last two years. The petitioner has no other permanent abode. He is residing in a small shop, where he is working as a tailor. Due to the above condition, the petitioner is being put to severe hardship and inconvenience. The petitioner is willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, condition No.6 in Annexure -1 order may be deleted.

3. When the Crl.M.C., came up for consideration on

17.02.2026, this Court called for a report from the Trial Court to ascertain the status of S.C.No.354/2024.

4. By communication dated 20.02.2026, the learned Sessions Judge has informed this Court that there are 73 witnesses cited by the prosecution. The report from the forensic science laboratory and the DNA analysis report have not been received. The Trial Court requires at least one year time to dispose of the case after the receipt of the FSL and DNA reports.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that, condition No.6 in Annexure -1 order may not be deleted because CW 7, 8 and 15 to 22, who are the near relatives of the deceased, continue to reside within the territorial limits of the Vazhikkadavu Police Station. If the petitioner is permitted to enter the territorial limits, there can be a law and order problem. Moreover, petitioner is said to be undergoing treatment for mental illness. Hence, the petitioner’s presence in the locality may turn out to be a danger for the lives of the witness in the crime. Hence, condition No.6 in Annexure – 1 order may not be deleted.

7. Undisputedly, Annexure -1 order was passed on

18.04.2024. It is nearly two year since the order is inforce. The prosecution does not have the case that the petitioner has not been scrupulously complying with the conditions in the s