High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2020-09-14Bail granted to the applicant subject to string...

Muhammed Niyas N v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020

Neutral Citation:/

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P. V. Kunhikrishnan
Judgment Date: 2020-09-14
Court Decision / Holding: Bail application allowed with stringent conditions: (1) petitioner to appear before IO within ten days for interrogation; (2) if IO proposes arrest, petitioner shall be released on bail on a bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties for similar amount; (3) petitioner to appear for interrogation as required and cooperate; (4) petitioner shall not leave India without Court’s permission; (5) petitioner shall not commit a similar offence; (6) petitioner shall appear before IO every Monday at 10 a.m. until final report; (7) petitioner shall comply with social distancing guidelines; (8) violation may result in cancellation of bail by the jurisdictional Court.
Final Disposition: Bail granted to the applicant subject to stringent conditions as stated above.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Muhammed Niyas N

Respondents

State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
• SMT.N.P.ASHA

Counsels for Respondents

• SRI.RENJITH.T.R., Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a bail application under section 438 Cr.P.C. filed by Muhammed Niyas N, the 4th accused in Crime No. 215/2018 of Kattakada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The allegations relate to a 8.2.2018 incident during an annual day event at St. Theresa School, Konniyoor, where the petitioner and other accused allegedly formed an unlawful assembly and attacked Riju and Saju with plastic chairs, with teachers intervening. The prosecution contends that multiple persons were injured and that the accused acted in furtherance of a common intention. The petitioner contends that he did not commit any offence, being an old student trying to resolve a dispute after a PTA-related misbehavior incident involving a girl student; he asserts willingness to abide any conditions if bail is granted. The court notes the delay in filing the bail application (filed 24.08.2020) and remarks that there is no current apprehension of arrest. Emphasizing the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, the court, after hearing both sides, grants bail with stringent conditions, while not expressing a view on the merits. The order also invokes COVID-19 related directives for confinement and social distancing, citing Supreme Court and Kerala High Court directions. The Court directs appearance before IO, interrogations, bonds, restrictions on travel, and mandatory cooperation, with possible cancellation of bail for violation.”

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 438 of Cr.P.C.Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 452, 427, 354, 307 r/w Section 149 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Bail is the rule and jail is the exception
Grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that he has not committed the alleged offences and was attempting to resolve the dispute arising from a separate incident involving the PTA President’s misbehavior towards a girl student. He is an elderly former student of the school and is willing to abide by any conditions if bail is granted. He notes the delay in investigation and the absence of arrest apprehension as factors in his favor, and emphasizes cooperation with authorities.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor argues that several persons sustained injuries during the incident and that the accused acted in furtherance of a common intention, forming an unlawful assembly in the school premises during an annual day event. Given the injuries and public interest, the court should closely scrutinize grant of bail, while acknowledging COVID-19 related constraints and the need to ensure a fair trial.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Re: Contagion of COVID19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020)	Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.1 of 2020	Mentioned Only	Cited to acknowledge Supreme Court/Full Bench directions on COVID-19 precautions in prisons; used to justify social distancing guidelines in the bail order.
W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020	W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020	Positive	Referenced for salutary directions issued by a Full Bench of this Court regarding minimizing prison population and related guidelines, which informed the COVID-19 precautions in the bail order.
Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement	2019 (16) SCALE 870	Positive	Cited for the principle that bail is the rule and refusal is the exception to ensure the accused has an opportunity for a fair trial.

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 Muhammed Niyas N v. State of Kerala 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** **MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 23RD BHADRA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.5362 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.215/2018 OF KATTAKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **MUHAMMED NIYAS N AGED 25 YEARS S/O. NASARUDEEN, SHYAS MANZIL, VATTAKAITHA, UNDAPPARA, POOVACHAL. P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695575** **BY ADVS. SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SMT.N.P.ASHA** ## **RESPONDENT:** **STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031** **R1 BY SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 2 ## **O R D E R** **Dated this the 14th day of September 2020** …. **This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) was heard through Video Conference.** **2. The petitioner is 4[th] accused in Crime No. 215 of Kattakada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,323,324,452,427,354,307 r/w. Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).** **3. The prosecution case is that, The petitioner and other accused in furtherance of their common intention formed themselves into an unlawful assembly on 8.2.2018 at 7.30 p.m. while the annual day celebration was going on in the St.Theresa School, Konniyoor. It is alleged that, the petitioner and other accused attacked one Riju and Saju by using plastic chairs which was prevented by** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 3 ## **the teachers and the accused have attacked them** **also.** **4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor.** **5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner has not committed any offence. The counsel submitted that, the brother of the PTA President misbehaved to a girl student. There was a push and pull in connection with that incident. In that incident, some persons were sustained minor injuries. The petitioner is an old student of that school. The petitioner was trying to solve the issue. The counsel submitted that, the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions, if this Court is granting bail to the petitioner.** **6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application. The public prosecutor submitted that, several persons sustained injuries in this incident.** **7. After hearing both sides, I think, this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions.** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 4 **The Crime is registered in 2018. This bail application was filed only on 24.8.2020. That means that there is no apprehension of arrest to the petitioner till now. I do not want to make any observation about the merit of this case. The incident happened in a school while an annual day celebration is going on. The public prosecutor submitted that, accused Nos.1,5 and 7 were already arrested in 2018. Probably, the investigation of the crime is delayed because the other accused are not arrested. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, this bail application is allowed on stringent conditions. There can also be a direction to the petitioner that the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation.** **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 COVID19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C)** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 5 **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 petitioner shall appear** **before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 6 ## **undergo interrogation;** **2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes 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;** **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;** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 7 ## **4. The petitioner shall not leave** **India without permission of the Court;** **5. 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;** **5. The petitioner will appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays' at 10 a.m. till the final report in Crime No.215 of Kattakada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram is filed;** **6. The petitioner 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 petitioner, the** B.A. NO.5362 OF 2020 8 **jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.** **Sd/-** **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **pkk** **JUDGE**