GOKUL KRISHNAN, YEDHU KRISHNAN, ABHIJITH, AJITH KUMAR, SIBY DAVID v. STATE OF KERALA

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1943** ## **Bail Appl..No.3351 OF 2021** **CRIME NO.207/2021 OF MALAYALAPUZHA POLICE STATION , Pathanamthitta** ## **PETITIONER/S:** - **1 GOKUL KRISHNAN 1. GOKUL KRISHNAN, AGED 26 YEARS, SON OF UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, THADATHIL PUTHANVEED, CHEENKALTHADAM P.O, PATHISSERI, MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689671** - **2 YEDHU KRISHNAN 2. YEDHU KRISHNAN, AGED 21 YEARS SON OF SAJI KUMAR, THADATHIL PUTHANVEED, CHEENKALTHADAM, PATHISSERI, MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689671** - **3 ABHIJITH 3. ABHIJITH, AGED 22 YEARS, SON OF GOPALAKRISHNAN NIAR, KAIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MOKKOOTTUMKAL, MALAYALAPPUZHA THAZHAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689664** - **4 AJITH KUMAR 4. AJITH KUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS, SON OF GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, KAIMOOTTIL HOUSE, MOKKOOTTUMKAL, MALAYALAPPUZHA THAZHAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689664** - **5 SIBY DAVID** **SIBY DAVID, AGED 28 YEARS, SON OF DAVID T. CHACKO, THAYYIL HOUSE, CHEENGALTHADAM P.O, MALAYALAPPUZHA VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689671** B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..2.. **BY ADVS. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SMT.SREELAKSHMI SABU** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031** **R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **SR.P.P.SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..3.. ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J** -------------------------------- ## B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ------------------------------Dated this the 07[th] day of May, 2021 ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) was heard through Video Conference. 2. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.207 of 2021 of Malayalapuzha Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 452, 427 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code 3. The prosecution case is that on 18.04.2021, at about 5.00 p.m., while the de facto complainant was standing in the kitchen of her house, she felt that some persons are walking towards her house. She noticed that 8 persons in four bikes carrying dangerous weapons are there in front of her house. It is alleged that the accused B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..4.. trespassed into the house and used filthy language. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a case is registered against the son of the de facto complainant in which the first petitioner sustained serious injuries. Annexure 2 is the FIR in that case. The de facto complainant and her son want to settle that case, which was refused by the first petitioner. Hence, the present false case is registered against the petitioners. The learned counsel submitted that the only non-bailable offence alleged against the petitioners is the offence under Section 452 IPC. The petitioners are ready to abide by any condition if this Court grant bail to them. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 5. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The only non-bailable offence alleged against the petitioners is the offence under Section 452 IPC. The petitioners alleged that it is a false case foisted against them because the first B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..5.. petitioner was not ready to compromise Crime No.439 of 2021 of Pathanamthitta Police Station which was registered against the son of the de facto complainant. I do not want to make any observation about the merits of the case. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the only non-bailable offence alleged is the offence under Section 452 IPC, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. 6. Moreover, the 2[nd] wave of COVID-19 is spreading in the country and the citizens are facing serious difficulties. In the state of Kerala, the 2[nd] wave of the pandemic is creating lot of problems and even the day-today life of the citizens are affected. Everyday, about 25,000 people are tested positive with COVID-19. In such circumstances, this Court has to consider this fact also while considering bail applications. The life is more important than anything. Therefore, I am considering this bail application based on the above pandemic situation. 7. Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..6.. spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020)** and a Full Bench of this Court in **W.P(C)No.9400 of 2020** issued various salutary directions for minimizing the number of inmates inside prisons. These happened during the 1[st] wave of COVID-19 season. 8. 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. 9. 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: B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..7.. 1. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within three weeks from today and shall undergo interrogation; 2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioners, they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned; 3. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; 4. Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the Court; 5. Petitioners shall not commit any offence B.A.No.3351 of 2021 ..8.. similar to the offence alleged in this case. 6. Petitioners shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic; 7. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, 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** ds 07.05.2021