Blog

Magistrate is directed to conclude the trial and dispose of the case within a period of six months as there are two cases of similar nature registered against the petitioner and upheld by High Court of Kerala through the learned bench led by HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL in the case of NOMAN vs. STATE OF KERALA (BAIL APPL. NO. 2547 OF 2022) on 4^th April, 2022.

 Brief facts of the case are that allegations raised against the petitioner are very serious. The allegation is that the accused persons had committed burglary in an ATM counter and committed theft of Rs.4,30,500/-, which led to the registration of Crime No. 41 of 2021 of Kannapuram police station in Kannur district. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has already been laid and the trial has already commenced.

Petitioner’s counsel submitted that that he was arrested on 04.03.2021, for more than one year he is in judicial custody, he has no direct role in the commission of the crime and hence he is sought to be released on bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is prepared to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Counsel stated that he is a lorry driver who had been returning after unloading chappals carried from Haryana, he has wife and five children, he is the sole breadwinner of the family and after affecting covid his wife has fallen seriously ill, so far she has not recovered from the ailment, his presence at home is absolutely essential.

Learned public prosecutor submitted that there are two cases of similar nature registered against him, that it is understood that he is involved in more crimes in different parts of the country and therefore it is not advisable to release him on bail. According to the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, he was apprehended with much difficulty from Haryana, if he is released on bail at this stage when the trial has commenced, prosecution would not be able to apprehend him again and the proceedings will be stalled.

Court regard to the gravity of the offence and antecedents of the petitioner held that it is not expedient in the interest of justice to release him on bail at this stage. The argument that he did not play active role in the commission of the crime does not seem correct. It is also evident that he was arrested from Haryana with difficulty. Such a person cannot be released on bail at this stage. Therefore the application for bail cannot be considered. And Magistrate is directed to conclude the trial and dispose of the case within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Click here to read the Judgment

Judgment reviewed by – Amit Singh