Moorthy alias Balasubramanian v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.7624 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.315/2020 OF Agali Police Station , Palakkad** ## **PETITIONER:** **MOORTHY ALIAS BALASUBRAMANIAN AGED 43 YEARS ALAMARAM, PUTHUR P.O., AGALI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN-678581** **BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031** - **2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AGALI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD PIN-678581** ## **SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A.No.7624 of 2020 2 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J** -------------------------------- ## B.A.No.7624 of 2020 ------------------------------Dated this the 24[th ] day of November, 2020 ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference. 2. Petitioner is the 2[nd] accused in Crime No.315 of 2020 of Agali Police Station, Palakkad. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 354 and 308 r/w. Section 34 IPC. The offence under Section 326 IPC is also subsequently added. 3. The prosecution case is that on 20.10.2020 at 5.45 pm at a place called “Swarnagadda', the accused in this case assaulted the de facto complainant. The specific allegation against the petitioner is that he pulled the sari of the de facto complainant, kicked her on her chest and abdomen and B.A.No.7624 of 2020 3 thereby outraged her modesty. It is also the prosecution case that the accused chased and intercepted the car in which the de facto complainant and her relatives were traveling and pressed on the neck of the de facto complainant's son. He was also hit on his head with a wooden stick thereby he fell unconscious. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. 4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a case and counter case. According to the counsel, the present case is the counter case and the case in which the petitioner and other accused are the victim is the main case. The counsel submitted that the main case registered earlier than the present case. The counsel submitted that the main case is Crime No.314 of 2020 whereas the present case is Crime No.315 of 2020. The counsel submitted that the petitioner sustained a serious stab injury in this case. The counsel submitted that in both cases, B.A.No.7624 of 2020 4 the offence under Section 308 IPC is there. The counsel submitted that the other accused were already released on bail by this Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C as per order dated 17.11.2020 in B.A.No.7587 of 2020. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is suffering from different illness and the learned counsel take me through the medical records produced along with the bail application to show that the petitioner is suffering from several illness. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grant him bail. 6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the other accused were released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. The Public Prosecutor submitted that serious injuries are sustained to the victim in this case. 7. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is a case and counter B.A.No.7624 of 2020 5 case. There are two versions about the same incident. Which version is correct cannot be decided while considering the bail application. 8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner has got some medical problems, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. 9. 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 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. 10. 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 B.A.No.7624 of 2020 6 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. 11. 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 ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. 2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a 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 officer concerned. B.A.No.7624 of 2020 7 3. 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. 5. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 6. 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. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with B.A.No.7624 of 2020 8 respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic. 8. 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** cms