AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking pre-arrest bail.
The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.526/2026 of Ernakulam North Town Police Station, Ernakulam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 110, 126(2), 296(b) and 351(3) r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that on 20.09.2026 at about 2.45 a.m., while the defacto complainant was returning home on a scooter bearing registration No. KL-07-CZ-6905 after attending his friend’s birthday function, he questioned the quarrel between the accused near his house. Due to this, the applicant and the accused No.2 abused him. Thereafter, in front of the defacto complainant’s house, the applicant pushed him off the scooter, caught hold of his neck, causing his gold chain to break and its cross-shaped locket to be lost, and assaulted him on his forehead and head with a scooter spanner, threatening to kill him. The accused No.2 also assaulted him on the head with a helmet and abused his mother when she intervened. The incident resulted in a fracture of the defacto complainant’s facial bone and deep injuries to his forehead and head, which were likely to cause his death. Thus, the applicant committed the aforementioned offences.
I have heard Sri.Jai George, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri.Thomas Sabu Vadakekut, the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the above crime. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
It is true that specific overt act has been attributed to the applicant in the FI Statement and that the defacto complainant sustained a fracture. However, Annexure-A2 would show that the applicant also sustained fracture in the very same incident and that he had given a complaint to the police to that effect. Considering the allegations made against the applicant, his custodial interrogation seems unnecessary. For these reasons, I find this to be an appropriate case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.
In the result, the application is allowed on the following conditions:-
The applicant shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest on executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer, as the case may be.
The applicant shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for discovery, if any, as and when demanded.
The applicant shall appear before the investigating officer between 10.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until further orders. He shall also appear before the investigating officer as and when required.
The applicant shall not commit any offence of a like nature while on bail.
The applicant 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 applicant 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.