The manner and method of commission of offence as stated by respondent is that the petitioner with the 2nd accused had dumped the body of the deceased is heinous in nature and the petitioner cannot be granted bail until the trail is completed and was upheld by High Court of Kerala through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. in the case of ELDHOSE vs. STATE OF KERALA (BAIL APPL. NO. 9446 OF 2021) on 21st March, 2022.
Brief facts of the case are that allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had borrowed money from the deceased and on 10-10-2021 the petitioner had called the deceased and required him to come to his house for the purpose of collecting the money lent by the deceased to the petitioner. It is alleged that when the deceased arrived at the house of the petitioner he was brutally attacked, as a result of which he succumbed to his injuries. Thereafter the petitioner together with the 2nd accused in the case (father of the petitioner) allegedly took the body of the deceased on the scooter of the deceased and dumped the body and the scooter in a nearby canal.
Petitioner’s counsel submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent in the matter and deceased had actually attempted to attack the petitioner and his parents and this was only prevented by the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody from 14-10-2021 and his continued detention is not required for the purposes of any investigation as the final report has already been filed in the matter, petitioner has no criminal antecedents. Petitioner is aged only 27 years and this is not a case where the custodial trial of the petitioner is warranted.
Learned Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant (brother of the deceased) submit that the petitioner is not entitled to bail. The manner and method of commission of offence and the fact that the petitioner with the 2nd accused had dumped the body of the deceased in a canal are pointed out to show that the killing of the deceased was not an accident. It is submitted that considering the brutal nature of the crime the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail. It is also pointed out that as a result of the murder of the deceased his family consisting of his wife and 3 minor children have been orphaned.
Court held that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail at present taking note of the fact that the other accused in the case (parents of the petitioner) have already been granted bail. However since main allegations are against the petitioner herein, he cannot be granted bail at this point of time. The bail application is dismissed.
Judgment reviewed by – Amit Singh