Aswin Raj vs State Of Kerala

C.S.Dias, J

The applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by accused in Crime No.10/2024 of Varandarappally Police Station, Thrissur, registered against them for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 363, 341, 323, 342, 308 & 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 84 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The petitioners were arrested on 04.01.2024.

B.A.No.946/2024 is filed by the accused Nos.2 & 3 and B.A.No.947/2024 is filed by the first accused in the above crime. As these bail applications are filed by the accused in the same crime, they are being considered and disposed of by this common order.

The common case of the prosecution, in brief, is that: due to the previous animosity of the accused towards the victim, who is a minor, on 22.10.2023, at around 09.30. hours, the accused in furtherance of their common intention, the first accused slapped the victim on his ears, while they were in the gymnasium and he placed a knife on the neck of the victim and threatened to do away with his life. Subsequently, on 25.12.2023, at around 18.00 hours, the second accused kidnapped the victim and took him to the house of the first accused on his bike and wrongfully confined him there. Thereafter, the second accused beat the victim on his ears and attempted to stab him on his neck with a knife; but since he evaded the attempt, his life was saved. Subsequently, on the following day, at around 18 hours, the accused Nos.1 & 3 took the victim again on the bike and the third accused caught hold of his neck and beat him on different parts of his body with bare hands. Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.

Heard; Sri. Rajesh Chakyat, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

The learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously argued that the petitioners are totally innocent of the accusations levelled against them. They have been falsely implicated in the crime. In fact, the present crime has been registered as a counterblast to the complaint lodged by the petitioners against the victim and his friend, who allegedly had an out of the marriage relationship with the wife of the third accused. When the said matter was revealed the present complaint has been filed as an arm-twisting tactic to pressurise the petitioners not to agitate their complaint. At any rate, the investigation in the case is practically complete and the recovery has been effected. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 06.01.2024. The petitioners are law abiding citizens without any criminal antecedents. Hence, they may be released on bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the applications. She contended that the investigation in the case is still in progress. The petitioners have committed a gruesome crime by kidnapping the victim and keeping him in their custody. She made available the accident register-cum-wound certificate of the victim dated 27.12.2023 issued by the Taluk Hospital, Pudukad. She also conceded to the fact that the petitioners have criminal antecedents, the recoveries have been effected and that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the last one month.

On going through the facts and the materials placed on record, it is evident that the first incident allegedly happened on 22.12.2023. It is further alleged that the accused again kidnapped the victim on 25.12.2023 & 26.12.2023. However, the First Information Report is seen registered only on 04.01.2024. There is no plausible explanation for the delay in lodging the complaint. It is also evident that there is complaint lodged by the third accused against the victim and his friend, on the allegation that the victim’s friend was maintaining an out of the marriage relationship with the wife of the third accused. I have also perused the accident register-cum-wound certificate of the victim dated 27.12.2023, which shows that the victim had not suffered any injuries, other than for having pain and swelling behind his left cheek.

On a consideration of the fact, materials placed on record, the rival submission made across the Bar, especially taking note of the fact that the victim has not sustained any grievous injuries, that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 06.01.2024, that the investigation in the case is practically  complete  and  the  recoveries  have  been effected,  I am of the definite view that the petitioners’ continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, I hold that the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail; but subject to stringent conditions.

In  the  result,  the  applications  are  allowed,  by directing the petitioners to be released on bail on them executing a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) each 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 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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever;

(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 passports, they shall file affidavits 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.

(vii)Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below.

(viii)Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to 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 Anr.[2020 (1) KHC 663].