LALKITCHU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICATIONS FOR REGULAR BAIL

(2.) The earlier applications were dismissed by this Court vide order dated 17.06.2020 and this is the 2nd time that they are appearing before this Court seeking indulgence for bail for the reason that they have completed one year on judicial custody and still the trial appears to be distant prepositions. A report was called for from the II Additional Sessions Judge, Paravur, where the matter is pending as S.C.No.588 of 2020, and the learned Judge submits that FSL report has not yet been received and in case, the forensic lab report is received, it will take about six months time for him to dispose of the matter, even if the trial is taken in an expeditious manner. The learned counsels appearing for the applicants would submit that the application for bail was dismissed because of the brutal manner in which the alleged murder was committed and also for the reasons that the applicants have criminal antecedents. Both the applicants have more than one criminal antecedents against them. But, it is pointed out by the learned counsels appearing for the applicants that the antecedents are of the year 2012 and 2016 and the latest antecedents against A3 is of the year 2019 is for a lesser offence under Sections 323 and 341 IPC.

(3.) The bail applications filed by the applicants were dismissed by a common order detailing the reasons why the bail was rejected and there was also a direction given to the Sessions Judge to expedite disposal of the matter. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that there are 91 witnesses cited for the prosecution. And the trial court has stated that the FSL report is still awaited. Under the circumstances, it seems that the trial is not likely to conclude within even the six months time sought for by the learned sessions Judge. Under the circumstances, this Court will have to be indulgent enough to grant bail to the applicants, but on stringent conditions, considering their antecedents.