Ravi M v. State of Kerala

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: C. S. Dias
Judgment Date: 2024-06-10
Court Decision / Holding: The bail application is allowed; the petitioner is to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties of equal amount, with conditions (i)-(viii) as specified in the order, including regular appearance, non-interference with witnesses, travel restrictions, passport surrender if applicable, and the court’s power to cancel bail on breach; investigation may proceed and recoveries may be effected as guided by Sushila Aggarwal.
Final Disposition: Bail granted to petitioner subject to conditions

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Ravi M

Respondents

State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
Sr. P.P. Sri C.S. Hrithwik

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Ummul Fida
• C. Ijlal Sheril
• Abraham P.
• P. Parvathy

Counsels for Respondents

• Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala
• Sri C.S. Hrithwik

Case Synopsis & Summary

Ravi M moved a bail application under Section 439 CrPC in Crime No. 240/2024 of the Railway Police Station, Ernakulam, registered for an offence punishable under Section 354 IPC. The prosecution alleges that on 22 May 2024, between 02:00 and 02:15 hours, while travelling in the Thiruvananthapuram–Mangalapuram Express, the petitioner groped the defacto complainant’s breast while she was asleep on an upper berth and outraged her modesty. The petitioner was arrested on 22 May 2024. He contends innocence and false implication, and submits that Annexure A1 remand report does not attract Section 354 IPC; he has already been in judicial custody for about 18 days, the investigation is practically complete, and he has no criminal antecedents. The Public Prosecutor opposes bail, arguing ongoing investigation, risk of witness intimidation and flight, and lack of roots in Kerala. The court cites Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar to note that lack of local roots cannot alone justify denying bail. After careful consideration, the judge concludes that further detention is unnecessary and grants bail, with stringent conditions including a Rs.50,000 bond with two solvent sureties, regular appearances before the Investigating Officer, restrictions on tampering with witnesses, travel restrictions, passport surrender, and power to cancel bail for breaches, while allowing continuing investigation and potential recoveries pursuant to Sushila Aggarwal guidance.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1981 SCC 181) — bail not to be denied merely for lack of roots in the state
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020 (1) KHC 663) — investigation and recoveries may be effected by the Investigating Officer even while on bail, under appropriate conditions

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends he is innocent and has been falsely implicated; the allegations in Annexure A1 do not attract Section 354 IPC. He has already served 18 days in custody, investigation is practically complete, and he has no prior criminal antecedents; bail should be granted.

Contentions of Respondents

The investigation is in progress; release on bail may lead to witness intimidation or flight; the petitioner lacks roots in Kerala; bail should be denied.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar	1981 SCC 181	Positive	Cited to support that lack of local roots cannot be a sole ground to deny bail.
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another	2020 (1) KHC 663	Positive	Cited to justify that investigations and recoveries may be conducted by the Investigating Officer even while the accused is on bail under appropriate conditions.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS** **MONDAY, THE 10[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1946 BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024** **CRIME NO.240/2024 OF RAILWAY POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM, Ernakulam PETITIONER/S:** **RAVI M AGED 54 YEARS S/O MUTHU SWAMI, 44/B1, POTHOTTAM STREET, PARAMARTHALINGA, KALIYAKADU CHURCH, KANYAKUMARI, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 629003** **BY ADVS. UMMUL FIDA C.IJLAL SHERIL ABRAHAM P.PARVATHY** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031** **SR.PP. SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 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.240/2024 of the Railway Police Station, Ernakulam, registered against him for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code( in short, 'IPC'). The petitioner was arrested on 22.05.2024. 2. The essence of the prosecution case is that: on 22.05.2024, between 02:00 and 02:15 hours, while the accused was traveling in ThiruvananthapuramMangalapuram express, he, without the consent of the defacto complainant, who was sleeping on the upper berth in the same coach, groped her on her breast and outraged her modesty. Thus, the accused has committed the above offence. BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 3 3. Heard; Smt.Ummul Fida, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.C.S.Hrithwik, the learned Public Prosecutor. 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 allegations in Annexure A1 remand report would substantiate that the offence under Section 354 of the IPC will not be attracted. In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 18 days, the investigation in the case is practically complete and the petitioner is a person without criminal antecedents. 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 submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every likelihood of him intimidating the witnesses and tampering with the BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 4 evidence. Moreover, the petitioner is a person who does not have roots in the State of Kerala. Hence, if the petitioner is released on bail, he may flee from justice. Therefore, the application may be dismissed. 6. The prosecution allegation against the petitioner is that in the early hours of 22.05.2024, the petitioner groped the breast of the defacto complainant and outraged her modesty. The fact remains that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 18 days, the investigation in the case is practically complete and the petitioner is a person without criminal antecedents. It is trite law in **Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar** [1981 SCC 181] merely because a person does not have roots in the State, the same cannot be treated as a ground to deny bail to the accused. 7. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 5 placed on record, and especially taking into account the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the last 18 days, that the investigation in the case is complete and that the petitioner is a person without criminal antecedents, I am of the definite view that the petitioner's further detention is unnecessary. Hence, I am inclined to allow the bail application, but subject to stringent conditions. 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 Tuesday and 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; BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 6 - (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 leave the territorial jurisdiction of the Court of Session, Ernakulam without the previous permission of the jurisdictional court. - (iv). The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; - (v). 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; - (vi). 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. BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 7 - (vii). Application for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. - (viii). 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 Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. sd/- ## **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** rkc/10.06.24 BAIL APPL. NO. 4639 OF 2024 8 ## **APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 4639/2024** ## **PETITIONER ANNEXURES** **Annexure A1** **THE TRUE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT IN CRIME NO. 240/2024 OF THE RAILWAY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DATED 22/05/2024**