Jansi, Govindan C., and Jayachandran v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.491 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.17/2020 OF Vandanmedu Police Station , Idukki** ## **PETITIONERS:** |**1**|**JANSI**| |---|---| ||**AGED 62 YEARS**| ||**W/O. GOVINDAN, KARITHALACKAL HOUSE, VAANDENMEDU,**| ||**VANDANMEDU P.O. UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT**| ||**685 551.**| |**2**|**GOVINDAN.C.,**| ||**AGED 73 YEARS**| ||**S/O. CHELLAPPAN,**| ||**KARITHALACKAL HOUSE, VAANDENMEDU, VANDAN MEDU P.O.**| ||**UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 551.**| |**3**|**JAYACHANDRAN,**| ||**AGED 43 YEARS**| ||**S/O. GOVINDAN, KARITHALACKAL HOUSE, VAANDENMEDU,**| ||**VANDAN MEDU P.O. UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT**| ||**685 551.**| ||**BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP**| ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA , ERNAKULAM 682 031.** - **2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VANDANMEDU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI POLICE STATION 685 551.** **3 EAPAN, AGED 68 YEARS S/O. EPAN, PATHAYIL VEEDU, CHELLAR KOVIL KARA, ANAKKARA VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA THALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 551.** **OTHER PRESENT:** B.A.No. 491 of 2020 2 **SRI.AJITH MURALI, PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A.No. 491 of 2020 3 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** **================== B.A.No. 491 of 2020 ================== Dated this the 14[th] day of August, 2020** ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference. 2. The petitioners are accused in crime No. 17 of 2020 of Vandanmedu Police Station, Iudkki District. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case is registered based on a private complaint filed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate Court, which is forwarded under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. 3. Admitted prosecution case is that, there is voilation of certain conditions in a sale agreement executed B.A.No. 491 of 2020 4 between the 1[st] petitioner, 2[nd] accused and the defacto complainant. It is alleged that, there is a violation of certain conditions in the agreement. It is an admitted fact that, there is a suit pending as O.S. No. 496 of 2019 before the Munsiff Court, Kattappana. This suit is filed by the 1[st] petitioner against the defacto complainant. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The petitioner impleaded the defacto complainant as the 2[nd] respondent. In the facts and circumstance of the case, I think no notice is necessary to the defacto complainant, in the light of the judgment in _**Vishnu Gopalakrishnan V. State of Kerala ( 2020 (4) KLT 825).**_ 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, no criminal offence is made out in this case. Even if, the entire allegations are accepted, the counsel submitted that, the remedy of the defacto complainant is to approach the Civil Court. The learned counsel for the petitioners also B.A.No. 491 of 2020 5 submitted that, they are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grants them bail. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor even though opposed the bail application, submitted that, if this Court is granting bail stringent conditions may be imposed. 7. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The prosecution case is that, there is violation of certain conditions in a sale agreement executed between the 1[st] petitioner, 2[nd] accused and the defacto complainant. I do not want make any observations about the merits of the case. Considering the entire facts and circumstance of this case, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. 8. Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in _**Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons**_ B.A.No. 491 of 2020 6 _**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. 9. 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. 10. 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 petitioners shall appear before the_ B.A.No. 491 of 2020 7 _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 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. The 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;_ _4. The petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the Court;_ B.A.No. 491 of 2020 8 _5. The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;_ _6. The 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._ 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** LU