Ratheesh @ Keedayi Ratheesh vs State Of Kerala

Shircy V, J

This petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1078 of 2020 of Puthukkad Police station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 294 (b) and 302 of the IPC.

The petitioner was arrested on 04.08.2020 and remanded to judicial custody on 05.08.2020.

On 12.01.2020 he was granted statutory bail by Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakuda. While granting statutory bail a condition was imposed that he should not commit any offence while on bail. After his release, the bail granted to him was cancelled by the very same court in C.M.P.No.4555/2020 on the finding that the petitioner has threatened an eye witness to the prosecution case on 14.12.2020 to the effect that in the event he depose against him, before the court he would kill him. Since such a threat was raised against an eye witness in the case registered against this petitioner in Crime No.1078 of 2020, on the statement of that eye-witness, Crime no.1382 of 2020 under Sec.341 and 506 (1) of the Indian Penal Code was registered and investigation was conducted and charge sheet was filed. Now the case is pending as C.C. No.323/2021 against this petitioner. Thereafter, a petition was moved for cancellation of bail by the Inspector of police and thus the bail granted to him was cancelled by the court by an order dated 12.1.2021.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner mainly on the ground that the petitioner has violated the bail condition by putting an eye witness under threat and now the case is ready for trial and it stands posted to 17.09.2021. Moreover, it is contended that this petitioner is an accused in five cases registered before the Vadanappally police station and two cases before Puthukkad polcie station. The details of the case have also been furnished by the Inspector of Police in the report submitted opposing this application. From the report it appears that the petitioner is a habitual offender/history-sheeter and though he was granted bail in the case, he violated the bail conditions and there was coercive action from his side and that is why the bail was cancelled by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, by an order dated 12.1.2021.

The criminal antecedents of this petitioner is so patent from the report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. The bail which has already been granted to him was cancelled as he raised dead threats towards a material witness in the murder case which is scheduled for trial. So, if the petitioner is released on bail a free and fair trial may not be possible. The witnesses have to appear before the court and depose the true facts transpired without any fear or threat from any corner. The safety of the witness is of-course a great concern of the court. It is well settled that bail once granted cannot be cancelled in a mechanical manner and only if there are supervening circumstances which are not conducive to a fair trial, such an order can be passed against an accused. From the materials available before me, it appears that circumstances are not sufficient to infer that the petitioner can retain his liberty at least during the trial of the case in which he is facing murder charge.

In short, it appears that custodial trial is inevitable in this case. Hence, the application is dismissed. The learned Trial Judge shall take all endeavor to conduct trial of the case and dispose of the same at the earliest without any delay, whatsoever.

Dismissed.