AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These applications are filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail.
B.A.No.6144 of 2026 is filed by the accused Nos.10 & 11 and B.A.No.6189 of 2026 is filed by the accused Nos.3, 5, 6 & 9 in Crime No.699/2026 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 118(1) and 109(1) r/w Section 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 15.09.2026, at around 22.30 hours, at Chathurakkinar in Puthukai Village, the accused Nos.1 to 10 along with three other identifiable accused persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and committed rioting, armed with deadly weapons. The accused Nos.1 and 2 beat the defacto complainant on his head with an iron rod, the remaining accused persons beat him with a wooden stick and thereby the accused committed the aforementioned offences.
I have heard Smt.Hemalatha, the learned counsel for the applicants in B.A.No.6144 of 2026, Sri.Arunkumar, the learned counsel for the applicants in B.A.No.6189 of 2026, Sri.Thomas Sabu Vadakekut, the learned Public Prosecutor and Smt.Aneeda Beegum, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicants with the alleged crime; hence, they are entitled to get bail. The learned Public Prosecutors, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicants, and if they are released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
I went through the FI Statement. The main allegation is against the accused Nos. 1 and 2, who used an iron rod. The allegation against the applicants is that they beat the defacto complainant with a reaper. The recovery has already been effected. Annexure-A2 in B.A.No. 6144 of 2026 would show that there is a counter case in respect of the very same incident. The accused Nos.5 and 7 sustained serious injuries in the incident, as evident from the copy of the discharge summary produced by the learned counsel before me for perusal. The defacto complainant is the accused in Annexure-A2. Considering the allegations made against the applicants, their custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find these to be appropriate cases to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants.
In the result, the applications are allowed on the following conditions:-
The applicants shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.
The applicants shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.
The applicants shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. They shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
The applicants shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
The applicants shall not attempt to contact any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
The applicants shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the trial Court.
The application, if any, for deletion/modification of bail conditions or cancellation of bail on the grounds of violating the bail conditions shall be filed at the jurisdictional court.