BY AD v. P.V.ANOOP

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 STATION HOUSE OFFICER KUNNAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673571 SHAMEER T AGED 36 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED, THELISHI HOUSE, CHERUVADI PO, CHULLIKKAPARAMB, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673661 BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 2 4 SHANID T AGED 27 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED, THELISHI HOUSE, CHERUVADI PO, CHULLIKKAPARAMB, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673661 SR PP SMT NEEMA T V THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 3 O R D E R This is the second application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the accused 1 to 3 in crime No.963/2023 of the Kunnamangalam Police Station, Kozhikode, registered against the accused for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs.365, 341, 323 and 307 read with Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners were arrested on 20.11.2023.

2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: around

16.30 hours on 15.11.2023, the accused forcefully made the younger brother of the defacto-complainant to enter into a car in front of KMCT Engineering College, Kallanthodu and they brutally assaulted and caused grievous injuries to the injured. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Sri.P.V.Anoop, learned counsel BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 4 appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Neema T.V, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that this Court had dismissed the earlier bail application filed by the petitioners as per Annexure E order principally on the submission made by the learned Public Prosecutor that the injured was still in a comatose stage and his statement could not be recorded and it is only after the injured regaining his consciousness, could the investigation progress. As per Annexure F certificate issued by the hospital, where the injured was treated, namely, IQRAA Hospital, Kozhikode, the injured was admitted on 15.11.2023 and was discharged on

05.12.2023. Therefore, the submission that the injured was in a comatose stage is not correct. Moreover, the petitioners have been in incarceration for the last 63 days. The investigation in the case is practically complete. The petitioners' further detention is unnecessary. The petitioners are willing to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the application may be BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 5 allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She justified her submission that the statement of the injured could not be recorded because he was in a comatose stage. The argument that, though the injured may have been discharged from the hospital, he could not give his statement. The investigation is still in progress. The recovery is to be effected. Therefore, the application may be dismissed.

6. On an overall consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 20.11.2023, which is more than 63 days, that Annexure F treatment record shows that the injured was discharged from the hospital on 05.12.2023, which is more than a month back, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and that the petitioners' further detention is unnecessary, I am of the definite view that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail, but subject to stringent conditions. Hence, I am BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 6 inclined to allow the bail application.

7. In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on their executing separate bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. They shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 7 (iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence while they are on bail; (iv) The petitioners shall surrender their passports, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If they have no passport, they shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; (v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law; (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. (vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to BAIL APPL.NO.445 OF 2024 8 effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioners even while the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another [2020 (1) KHC 663]. Sd/- C.S.DIAS JUDGE