Kens Sabu vs State Of Kerala

Shircy V, J

This application for bail is filed by the petitioner who is the fourth accused undergoing incarceration in connection with Crime No.800/2019 of

Gandhinagar police station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 328, 296, 324, 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution allegation is that on 11.6.2018 this petitioner along with the other accused due to their enmity towards the defacto complainant

trespassed into a toddy shop bearing number T.S.No.38 of Pallithazhathu Bhagom, Kaippuzha and sprayed pepper powder towards the

face of the defacto complainant and assaulted him brutally and caused fatal injuries including fracture to his nasal bone. They have also assaulted

another person who intervened to rescue the defacto complainant and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

The records would reveal that the case is pending as S.C No.453/2019 before the Assistant Sessions Court, Kottayam. As submitted by the learned

Public Prosecutor apart from this case the petitioner is involved in 15 cases. Out of that, 5 cases have been registered against him in the year 2021

itself. KAAPA proceedings have also been initiated against this petitioner. So in short, he is a history-sheeter.

The learned Assistant Sessions Judge while disposing his bail application had mentioned that this petitioner though granted bail absconded for

sometime and then he was arrested and produced on 19.2.2021 . Later bail was granted to him on 26.2.2021. Thereafter also he absconded and so,

coercive steps have been initiated and again he was arrested and produced on 4.10.2021. So the records would reveal that though he was granted bail

he absconded twice and only after initiating coercive steps, he was arrested. It is also to be noted that the learned Assistant Sessions Judge has

specifically reported on the basis of the endorsement in the order sheet of this particular case that this petitioner remained absent before the court on

all posting dates while he was on bail.

On a perusal of the entire facts involved in this case I am fully convinced that the petitioner is a history sheeter and even then, bail was granted to

him in this case twice, but he absconded violating the bail conditions.

Considering the peculiar character and antecedents of the petitioner, I think that he do not deserve a lenient approach in the matter of bail. If released

again on bail the likelihood of the petitioner fleeing from justice interdicting fair trial of the case cannot be ruled out. Apart from the possibility of the

petitioner absconding ,repeating similar offences and tampering with the witnesses, are also there. .Moreover as per the report of the learned

Assistant Sessions Judge, the court requires only four months time for disposal of the case. Taking into account of the peculiar factual scenario , I find

that this petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail at this stage. Hence, I am compelled to dismiss the application.

Dismissed.