High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeCommon order issuing bail in all five connected...

Aneesh A.J. v. State of Kerala & Station House Officers (Five connected bail applications) - High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

Case / Petition Number:BAIL APPL. NOS. 3297/2023; 3298/2023; 3325/2023; 3327/2023; 3330/2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P. V. Kunhikrishnan
Judgment Date
2023-05-09
Court Decision / Holding
The bail applications are allowed. The petitioner is to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. The petitioner must appear before the investigating officer as and when required, shall not leave India without permission of the court, shall cooperate with the investigation, shall refrain from inducing or threatening witnesses, and shall not commit any offence similar to those alleged. If violated, bail may be canceled. The orders are common due to the shared facts across the five cases.
Final Disposition
Common order issuing bail in all five connected bail applications

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Aneesh A.J.

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
  • The Station House Officer, Njarakkal Police Station, Ernakulam District, Kerala
  • The Station House Officer Kaduthuruthy Police Station, Kaduthuruthy, Kerala
  • The Station House Officer Punnoapra (Punnapra) Police Station, Alappuzha District, Kerala
  • The Station House Officer Aroor Police Station, Alappuzha District, Kerala
  • The Station House Officer Njarakkal Police Station, Ernakulam District, Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • T. Asafali
  • • Laliza.T.Y.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. C. N. PrabhaKaran, Public Prosecutor
  • • Smt. T. V. Neema, Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a common order disposing of five connected bail applications filed under Section 439 CrPC by Aneesh A.J., a suspended Civil Excise Officer, arising from five separate crimes: 1356/2022 (Njarakkal), 230/2023 (Punnapra), 36/2023 (Kaduthuruthy), 765/2022 (Aroor), and 1347/2022 (Njarakkal). The petitioner, arrayed as second accused in all cases, contends that even if the allegations are accepted, no offence under Section 420 IPC is made out, and he is willing to comply with stringent conditions. The State, represented by Public Prosecutors in the various matters, opposes bail. The prosecution contends that de facto complainants paid substantial sums to secure employment abroad and that the petitioner, not being an authorized recruiting agency, has cheated the victims; the matter merits continued custody. The court acknowledges the well-settled principle that bail is the rule and detention is the exception, citing Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement to justify bail. It also notes Archana Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2021) 3 SCC 750, to consider whether paying for a job falls under 420 IPC. The court, applying the Archana Rana principle as a matter for investigation, grants bail in all five matters with common terms: bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties, appearance before IO, restriction on travel, and a duty not to induce or commit similar offences. A common order reflects the similar facts and the petitioner’s custodial status.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of CrPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
  • Paying money to obtain a job does not automatically amount to cheating under Section 420 IPC (Archana Rana principle).
  • Archana Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2021) 3 SCC 750
  • Chidambaram P v Directorate of Enforcement, (2019) (16) SCALE 870

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner’s counsel contended that even if all allegations are accepted, no offence under Section 420 IPC is made out. He submitted the petitioner is ready to abide by stringent conditions if bail is granted. He relied on the overarching principle that bail is the rule and detention is the exception.

Contentions of Respondents

The prosecution contended that the de facto complainants paid huge sums to secure jobs abroad and that the petitioner, not being an authorized recruiting agency, facilitated cheating. It urged that custodial investigation is necessary given the gravity and the systemic nature of the allegations.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Archana Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others(2021) 3 SCC 750Mentioned OnlyCited to discuss whether paying money to obtain a job amounts to Section 420 IPC; its applicability is left for investigation.
Chidambaram P v Directorate of Enforcement2019 (16) SCALE 870PositiveCited to affirm the bail-principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception in the jurisprudence on bail.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Aneesh A.J. v. State of Kerala & Station House Officers (Five connected bail applications) - High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 19TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3297 OF 2023 ``` ## **`CRIME NO.1356/2022 OF NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:`** ``` ANEESH A.J. AGED 37 YEARS, S/O JAMES CIVIL EXCISE OFFICER (NOW UNDER SUSPENSION), ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, POST THATHAPPALLY, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KERALA, PIN - 683520 BY ADVS. T.ASAFALI LALIZA.T.Y. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & THE COMPLAINANT:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` - `2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER NJARAKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 682505` ``` BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C. N. PRABHAKARAN ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.05.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3298/2023, 3325/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 2 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 19TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3298 OF 2023 CRIME NO.0036/2023 OF KADUTHURUTHI POLICE STATION, ``` ## **`KOTTAYAM`** ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` ANEESH.AJ. AGED 37 YEARS CIVIL EXCISE OFFICER, NOW UNDER SUSPENSION, RESIDING AT ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, POST THATHAPPALLY, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. KERALA., PIN - 683520 BY ADVS. T.ASAFALI LALIZA.T.Y. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & THE COMPLAINANT:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031` - `2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KADUTHURUTHI POLICE STATION, POST KADUTHURUTHI686604,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,KERALA, PIN - 686604 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. T. V. NEEMA` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.05.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3297/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 3 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 19TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3325 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.0230/2023 OF PUNNAPRA POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` ANEESH A.J. AGED 37 YEARS, S/O JAMES CIVIL EXCISE OFFICER, (NOW UNDER SUSPENSION),ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, POST THATHAPPALLY, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 683520 BY ADVS. T.ASAFALI LALIZA.T.Y. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & THE COMPLAINANT:`** ``` 1STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2STATION HOUSE OFFICER PUNNA0PRA POLICE STATION, POST PUNNAPPRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 688003 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C. N.PRABHAKARAN ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.05.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3297/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 4 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 19TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3327 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.0765/2022 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` ANEESH A.J. AGED 37 YEARS CIVIL EXCISE OFFICER (NOW UNDER SUSPENSION),ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, POST THATHAPPALLY, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,KERALA, PIN - 683520 BY ADVS. T.ASAFALI LALIZA.T.Y. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & THE COMPLAINANT:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031` - `2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER AROOR POLICE STATION, POST AROOR,ALAPPUZHA DIST, KERALA, PIN - 688534` ``` BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTORSRI.C.N. PRABHAKARAN ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.05.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3297/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 5 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 19TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3330 OF 2023 ``` ``` CRIME NO.1347/2022 OF NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/ACCUSED:`** ``` ANEESH A.J. AGED 37 YEARS, S/O JAMES, CIVIL EXCISE INSPECTOR,(NOW UNDER SUSPENSION), RESIDING AT ARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, POST THATHAPPALLY, NORTH PARUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683520 BY ADVS. T.ASAFALI LALIZA.T.Y. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/STATE & THE COMPLAINANT:`** - `1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031` ``` 2THE STATION OFFICER NJARAKAL POLICE STATION, POST NJARAKAL,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 682505 ``` ``` BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. T. V. NEEMA ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.05.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3297/2023 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 6 **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------B.A.Nos.3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 ------------------------------Dated this the 9[th] day of May, 2023 COMMON ORDER** These Bail Application are filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code . 2. The petitioner in these bail applications is one and the same and therefore I am disposing of these bail applications by a common order. The petitioner is accused in Crime No.1356/2022 of Njarakkal Police Station, Crime No.230/2023 of Punnapra Police Station, Crime No.36/2023 of Kaduthuruthi Police Station, Crime No. 765/2022 of Aroor Police Station and Crime No.1347/2022 of Njarakkal Police Station. All these cases are registered against the petitioner B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 7 alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that, the petitioner who is arrayed as second accused in the above cases promised the respective de facto complainants in these cases job in Russia and collected huge amount. It is alleged that the petitioner committed cheating. Similar type of allegations are there in all these bail applications. The petitioner is in custody in these cases. 4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence under Section 420 IPC is made out. It is also submitted the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this Court grants him bail. B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 8 The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 5. This Court considered the contention of the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. The main allegation is that the de facto complainants paid huge amount for getting job in a foreign country and the petitioner has not arranged the job. Why the victims in these cases paid amount to the petitioner, when admittedly the petitioner is not a authorised recruiting agency, is not clear. 6. In **Archana Rana v. State of Uttar Pradesh** **and others** [(2021) 3 SCC 750], the Apex Court observed that giving money to get job will not amounts to the offence under Section 420 IPC. Whether the principle laid down in the above case is applicable in the facts and circumstances of this case, is a matter to be investigated. The indefinite B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 **==> picture [7 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** detention of the petitioner may not be necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioner can be released on bail in stringent conditions. 7. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the 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. 8. 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 B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** following directions: 1. Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. 2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate 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. 3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar B.A.Nos. No. 3297,3325,3298,3327 and 3330 of 2023 **==> picture [13 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. 5. 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. Sd/- ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE** rmm