Sheyas vs State Of Kerala

Gopinath P., J

These are applications for regular bail.

The petitioners in these bail applications are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.2263/2019 of Kayamkulam Police Station, which is now pending as S.C.No.178/2020 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Mavelikkara.

The allegation against the petitioner is that on 20.8.2019 at about 11.30 p.m., when the de facto complainant and his friends came out of a Bar Hotel by name 'Highway Palace', the accused including the petitioners in these cases, who were waiting out side the Bar in a car, had an altercation with them. It is alleged that the 1st accused, who was behind the steering wheel of the car knocked down the de facto complainant and his friend Sachin and caused serious injuries to them. The deceased Shameer intervened in the matter and at that time, the 2nd accused, who was sitting in the front passenger seat of the car hit Shameer on his head with beer bottle, as a result of which the deceased Shameer had fallen to the ground. Thereafter, the 1st accused took his car forward for some distance and thereafter, reversed the car at great speed and ran the car over the deceased Shameer resulting in his death.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would raise a contention that the petitioners have been in custody from 28.3.2019 and their continued incarceration is a violation of their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that they have a valid defence in the matter and the allegations raised by the prosecution are not correct. It is submitted that a final report has been filed in the matter and the matter is now pending as S.C.No.178/202 before the Additional District and Sessions Court-I, Mavelikkara and the continued detention of the petitioners is not necessary.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.

The learned Public Prosecutor points out that the bail application of the petitioners in these case was considered earlier by this Court twice through orders in B.A.No.3838/2020 and B.A.No.7220/2020 dated 10.7.2020 and 7.12.2020 respectively. It is submitted that on both occasions, this Court had found that the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail. The matter was considered in detail, in the order in B.A.No.3838/2020 and thereafter, through the order in B.A.No.7220/2020, this Court found that there are no change of circumstances warranting the grant of bail to the petitioners.

Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Pappu Yadav; (2005) KHC 605=(2005) 2 SCC 42, this Court held that though the principle of res judicata and such other principles are not applicable to a criminal proceedings, Courts are bound by the doctrine of judicial discipline and unless there is a substantial change of circumstances warranting a different view being taken, this Court should not consider the grant of bail. This is a case where on two occasions earlier this Court has found that the petitioners are not entitled to be released on bail. I see no change of circumstances warranting a different view being taken.

These bail applications are therefore dismissed.