Pramod v. State of Kerala

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **MONDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1946** **BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.578/2024 OF Kattappana Police Station, Idukki** **AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.2024 OF 2024 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , KATTAPPANA PETITIONER/S:** **PRAMOD,AGED 45 YEARS, S/O RAVEENDRAN P R,PARACKAL HOUSE, KATTAPPANA BHAGOM,KATTAPPANA KARA, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE,IDUKKI DISTRICT -, PIN - 685508** **BY ADVS. S.RAJEEV V.VINAY M.S.ANEER ANILKUMAR C.R. K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN NOURIN S. FATHIMA** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 JEEVAN ,S/O.PRASAD THOMAS, KANIYARAKATHU HOUSE,KATTAPANA P.O, IDUKKI DISTRICT ( SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED )** **BY ADVS. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NIREESH MATHEW ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** ## **ADGP SRI GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE ,SR PP SRI C K SURESH** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 2 ## **ORDER** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in Crime No.578/2024 of the Kattappana Police Station, Idukki, registered against him for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code( in short, 'IPC'). The petitioner was arrested on 24.04.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 23.04.2024, at around 20.20 hours, the accused, out of his previous animosity towards one Jeevan, entered into the reception area of a fitness centre and attempted to murder Jeevan with a knife. The injured suffered grievous injuries in the incident. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Sri.S.Rajeev, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.C.K.Suresh, the learned BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 3 Public Prosecutor and Sri.Nireesh Mathew, the learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant/intervener. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations leveled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. A reading of the Annexure II FIR would show that the offence under Section 307 will not be attracted. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last forty days, the investigation in the case is practically complete and recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioner's further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the application may be allowed. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. He submitted that the investigation in the case is in progress. He also stated that the petitioner is a person with criminal antecedents, since he is involved in four other crimes. If the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of him intimidating the witnesses BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 4 and tampering with the evidence. Hence, the application may be dismissed. 6. The learned counsel for the intervenor also opposed the application. He submitted that the petitioner has committed a very heinous crime by stabbing the injured. If the petitioner is released on bail, the defacto complainant/injured has an apprehension for his life at the hands of the petitioner. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner refuted the submissions of the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the counsel for the intervener. He made available the case details of the four crimes which shows that all the four cases have concluded. The petitioner has been acquitted in one of the cases and he was sentenced to pay fine in the three other cases. He submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 24.04.2024. Therefore, the petitioner may be released on bail. BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 5 8. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that on 23.04.2024 he trespassed into the fitness centre of the defacto complainant and injured him with a knife. The fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 40 days, the investigation in the case is complete and recovery has been effected. 9. In **Sanjay Chandra v. CBI,** [2012 1 SCC 40], the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence until a person is found guilty. Any imprisonment prior to conviction is to be considered as punitive and it would be improper on the part of the Court to refuse bail solely on the ground of former conduct. 10. In **Dataram Singh v. State of U.P.,** [(2018) 3 SCC 22] the Honourable Supreme Court observed that grant of bail is a rule and putting a person in jail is an exception. Even though the grant of bail is entirely the BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 6 discretion of the court, it has to be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case and the discretion has to be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner. 11. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is an exception, which is on the touch stone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Once the charge sheet is filed, a strong case has to be made out for continuing a person in judicial custody. The right to bail cannot be denied merely due to the sentiments of the society. 12. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, and especially taking into account the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 40 days, that the investigation in the case is complete and recovery has been effected, I am of the definite view that the petitioner's further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application. BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 7 In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him 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 court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m till the final report is laid. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure 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 or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; iii. The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 8 iv. The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; v. In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. vi. Application for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. vii. Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 9 Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and** **another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. sd/- **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** rkc/03.06.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 3707 OF 2024 10 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3707/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **Annexure I** **A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 25.04.2024 IN CMP NO 2024/2024 JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-I, KATTAPPANA** **Annexure II** **A COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 578/2024** ## **RESPONDENT ANNEXURES** **Annexure-R2(a) True photocopy of the CT Scan report of the victim issued from St. John's Hospital, Kattappana dated 23.04.2024** **Annexure-R2(b) True photocopy of the medical certificate dated 24.04.2024 issued from Caritas Hospital, Kottayam**