Ananthhu v. State of Kerala

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944 BAIL APPL. NO. 3267 OF 2022 CRIME NO.339/2022 OF Sooranadu Police Station, Kollam ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` ANANTHU AGED 23 YEARS S/O. VENU.G, KAILASAM, ERAVICHIRA NADUVIL, SOORANAD SOUTH VILLAGE, PATHARAM. P.O, KUNNATHOOR THALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690522 BY ADV P.V.DILEEP ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682031 2THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER SOORANAD POLICE STATION, SOORANAD .P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT PIN – 690522 ``` ``` BY SENIOR ADV.SMT.SREEJA V. ``` ## **`THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION`** ``` ON 04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **B.A.No.3267/2022** **2** **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------B.A.No.3267 of 2022 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 04[th] day of May, 2022** ## **ORDER** This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Petitioner is apprehending arrest in Crime No.339/2022 of Sooranad Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences inter alia under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 26.03.2022 at 7.30 pm, 25 identifiable volunteers appointed in connection with the temple festival of Poruvazhi Peruviruthi Malanada Temple, unlawfully assembled together and assaulted the defacto complainant with a stump on the various parts of the body. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. **B.A.No.3267/2022** **3** 4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the incident is not happened as alleged by the petitioner. The counsel also submitted that the alleged incident occurred in connection with the temple festival. The petitioner and others were appointed by the temple as volunteers. There was a clash between two groups and the petitioner and other committee members were trying to avoid the clash. The counsel also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant him bail. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, I think this Bail Application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is serious. But, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary for completing the investigation. The petitioner can be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer till final report is filed. 5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the **B.A.No.3267/2022** **4** bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870),** after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. 6. Recently the Apex Court in **Siddharth v State of Uttar Pradesh and Another (2021(5)KHC 353)** considered the point in detail. The relevant paragraph of the above judgment is extracted hereunder. “12. We may note that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. **B.A.No.3267/2022** **5** (Joginder Kumar v. State of UP and Others (1994 KHC 189: (1994) 4 SCC 260: 1994 (1) KLT 919: 1994 (2) KLJ 97: AIR 1994 SC 1349: 1994 CriLJ 1981)) If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation we fail to appreciate why there should be a compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused.” 7. Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions: 1. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within two weeks from today and shall undergo interrogation. 2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail on executing a **B.A.No.3267/2022** **6** bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer concerned. 3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 4. The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 5. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 10 am, till final report is filed. **7** ## **B.A.No.3267/2022** 6. The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. 7. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Court to cancel the bail, if any of the above conditions are violated. JV sd/- **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** **8** ## **B.A.No.3267/2022** ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3267/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-1THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO. 339/2022 OF SOORANAD POLICE STATION IN KOLLAM DISTRICT ```