Sanjeev and Abhilash v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.2300 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.152/2020 OF NOORANADU POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA** ## **PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:** **1 SANJEEV AGED 34 YEARS S/O.SASIDHARAN, SAJAN NIVAS, KARIMULAYKKAL MURI, CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, KOMALLOOR P.O., CHARUMOOD, MAVELIKKARA, PIN-690505. 2 ABHILASH J., AGED 28 YEARS S/O.JAYAPRASAD, UNNICHIVILAYIL, PEROOR, KARANMA MURI, THAMARAKULAM VILLAGE, CHARUMOOD, MAVELIKKARA, PIN690530.** **BY ADVS. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD SMT.M.N.ANITHA** ## **RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:** **STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.** ## **BY SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 2 ## **O R D E R** **Dated this the 7th day of August 2020** … **This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.** **2. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 152 of 2020 of Nooranadu Police Station, Alappuzha District. The above case is registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,149, 447,294(b),506,323,326 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).** **3. The prosecution case is that, on 4.2.2020 at about 10 p.m. all the accused persons formed into an unlawful assembly and trespassed into the courtyard of the de facto complainant and attacked her son by accused Nos.2 and 3 by using a Nanjack. On seeing the incident, the de facto complainant interefered and during that time, the 2[nd] accused forcibly pushed at her chest and thereby outraged** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 3 **her modesty and he attacked the de facto** **complainant with a wooden piece. The prosecution allegation against the 1[st] accused is that, he attacked with an iron rode and thereby the de facto complainant son sustained fracture on his ring finger.** **4. Heard the learned counsel for the** **petitioners and the public prosecutor.** **5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, this is a case and counter case. Annexure A1 is the F.I.R. in the present case. Annexure A2 is the F.I.R. in the counter case. According to the counsel for the petitioner, place of occurrence, time of occurrence and date of occurrence are same in Annexure A1 and A2 F.I.Rs. According to the counsel, the injured in both cases sustained grievous hurt. The counsel submitted that, the petitioners are ready co-operate with the investigation and they are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grants them bail.** **6. The learned public prosecutor opposed the** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 4 **bail application. The public prosecutor submitted that a lady is the injured in the present case. She sustained a fracture on her hand. The public prosecutor conceded that this is a case and counter case. The public prosecutor submitted that weapon used in this case is to be recovered and therefore the presence of the accused is necessary in this case. The public prosecutor submitted that, if this Court grants them bail, stringent conditions may be imposed.** **7. There are allegations and counter allegations about the same incident. Both parties sustained grievous hurt. Which version is correct is a matter to be investigated by the Police. This bail application was filed on 20.3.2020. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that there was an oral direction not to arrest the petitioners. Probably, the Police may be waiting for the disposal of this bail application for completing their investigation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think, this** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 5 **bail application can be 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 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.** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 6 **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 petitioners 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 petitioners, they shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;** **3. The petitioners shall appear** **before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners shall** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 7 **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 petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the Court; 5. The petitioners shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected; 6. The petitioners shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social** B.A. NO.2300 OF 2020 8 **distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;** **7. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.** **pkk** **Sd/P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE**