AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail.
The applicant is the accused No.1 in Crime No.1175/2026 of Vaikom Police Station, Kottayam District. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections 109(1), 118(1), 126(2) and 296(b) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The prosecution case, in short, is that due to previous enmity towards Jithin Gopi, a friend of the defacto complainant, the applicant and the accused No.2, in furtherance of their common intention and with the intention of causing his death, wrongfully restrained him at about 10.15 p.m. on 05.08.2026, on the public pathway in front of his house at Kattikkunnu. The applicant stabbed Jithin Gopi on his forehead and head with a knife. When the defacto complainant intervened, the applicant stabbed him on his left neck, back and right arm with the same knife, while the accused No.2 assaulted him on the neck with a billhook brought from the house of the applicant, thereby attempting to cause his death. Thus, the applicant committed the aforementioned offences.
I have heard Adv. Sruthi Das, 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 present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the alleged incident occurred as a part of the intentional criminal acts of the applicant, and he is not entitled to bail at this stage.
The applicant was remanded to judicial custody on 06.08.2026. A perusal of the case diary would reveal that the accusation against the applicant is very serious, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part. Specific overt act has been attributed against the applicant. The de facto complainant and the injured sustained serious injuries. Moreover, the applicant has criminal antecedents. He is involved in eight other cases and proceedings under the KAAPA were initiated against him on 22.9.2026. Considering the nature of the crime, the gravity of the offence, the complicity of the applicant in it, and the facts and circumstances mentioned above, I am of the view that the applicant cannot be released on bail at this stage. The bail application, accordingly, is dismissed.