Ratheesh Kumar v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** ## **FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.5610 OF 2020** **[CRIME NO.831/2020 OF ELAVUMTHITTA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA]** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **RATHEESH KUMAR AGED 35 YEARS** **ERUMATHADATHIL, MUTTAHTUKONAM P O CHENNEERKKARA, PATHANAMTHTTA DISTRICT 689625** **BY ADV. SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN** ## **RESPONDENT:** ## **STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031** ## **BY SRI.BINEESH.P.P., PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 2 ## **O R D E R** **Dated this the 11th 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 the 1[st] accused in Crime No.831 of 2020 of Elavumthitta Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i), 354 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).** **3. The prosecution case is that, a civil suit is pending with respect to a pathway between the defacto complainant and the petitioner before the Munsiff's Court, Pathanamthitta. The petitioner and other accused were doing some concrete work near the side of the disputed pathway. By that time the complainant along with her daughter has informed the petitioner that, an order of temporary injunction is** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 3 **pending against the petitioner with respect to the pathway. Due to that reason, the petitioner under the instigation of the other accused, uttered abusive language to the complainant and her daughter. It is alleged that, the petitioner using a piece of PVC pipe, beat on the back side of the body as well as head of the daughter of the complainant and also pushed her down. It is further alleged that, the petitioner tore the shawl of the churidar worn by the daughter of the complainant and also kicked her abdomen. Hence, it is alleged that, the petitioner committed the said offence.** **4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor.** **5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence under Section 354 IPC is made out. The counsel submitted that, the Sessions Court denied bail to the petitioner mainly for the reason that, he is involved in seven other cases. The counsel submitted that, this is a false submission** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 4 **made by the Police before the Sessions Court. The petitioner produced Annexure-I to Annexure-VII along with a petition. Annexure-II is the order of this Court in Crl.M.C. No. No.3382 of 2015 by which the proceedings under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. is quashed. The counsel submitted that, Annexure-III to AnnexureVI will show that, other cases were already quashed by the court concerned. The counsel submitted that, the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. 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, even though opposed this bail application, submitted that, if this Court is granting bail to the petitioner, the same may be on stringent conditions.** **7. After hearing both sides, I think, this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. A reading of Annexure-II to Annexure-VI, it is clear that, criminal cases alleged against the petitioner are already quashed or closed. The only non bailable** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 5 **offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 354 IPC. Whether an offence under Section 354 IPC is made out or not is a matter to be investigated by the investigating officer. I do not want to make any observations about the merits of this case. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, this bail application is 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 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** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 6 **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 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** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 7 ## **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;** **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;** **6. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued** B.A. NO.5610 OF 2020 8 **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 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**