Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail Granted

Shaiju @ Saju and Sarath @ Jithu v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:Bail Appl. No.1515 of 2020
Neutral Citation:/null

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
Judgment Date
2020-08-20
Court Decision / Holding
The bail application is allowed with the following directions: (1) Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days and undergo interrogation; (2) After interrogation, if the IO proposes to arrest them, they shall be released on bail on a bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties of like amount; (3) Petitioners shall appear for further interrogation as required and cooperate with the investigation; (4) Petitioners shall not leave India without court permission; (5) Petitioners shall not commit any similar offence; (6) Petitioners shall abide by social distancing guidelines; (7) If any conditions are violated, the jurisdictional court can cancel bail, in accordance with law.
Final Disposition
Bail Granted

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • SHAIJU @ SAJU
  • SARATH @ JITHU

Respondents

  • The State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Sri.K.R.Sunil

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Santhosh Peter, Sr.GP

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a bail application under Section 438 CrPC by two petitioners, Shaiju @ Saju and Sarath @ Jithu, accused in Crime No. 171 of 2020 registered at Kareelakulangara Police Station, Alappuzha district. The offences alleged are under IPC sections 294(b), 323, 341, 324, and 308 r/w 34. The petitioners contend that the case involves a dispute pertaining to a pathway and include a counter case (164/2020) arising from the same incident; annexures A1 (this case) and A2 (counter case) are relied upon to show factual grounds. The prosecution maintains that the injuries were serious and that the petitioners’ presence is necessary for investigation. The court, after hearing both sides, notes that there is a dispute and a civil suit pending, and that time has elapsed since the incident. It also recognizes the Covid-19 context, citing Supreme Court and Kerala High Court guidelines to minimize prison population. Citing the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception, supported by Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement, the court ultimately grants bail on stringent conditions. Conditions include appearance before the IO within ten days, a bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties, ongoing cooperation with the investigation, restriction on leaving the country, prohibition on inducing witnesses, and compliance with social distancing guidelines; bail may be canceled for violation. The order emphasizes the need to balance liberty with the integrity of the investigation during the pandemic.

Provisions of Law Cited

CrPC Section 438IPC Sections 294(b), 323, 341, 324, 308 read with Section 34

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
  • The accused has the opportunity of securing a fair trial (as a guiding principle in bail jurisprudence).

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the case involves a dispute over a pathway and that this is a case and counter-case; Annexures A1 and A2 FIRs are relied upon to show facts; they are ready to comply with any conditions. They emphasize there is a civil suit pending and request bail on terms.

Contentions of Respondents

The State contends that injuries were serious and the petitioners’ arrest is necessary for investigation; the presence of petitioners is essential to complete investigation, and maintaining law and order in the area is important.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement2019 (16) SCALE 870PositiveCited for the core bail principle: bail is the rule and refusal is the exception to ensure a fair trial.
Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons caseSuo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020Mentioned OnlyCited to reflect Supreme Court directions on minimizing prison populations during COVID-19; used as background guidance.
W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020Mentioned OnlyFull Bench directions regarding social distancing in prisons cited as supportive background.

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 Shaiju @ Saju and Sarath @ Jithu 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** ## **THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 29TH SRAVANA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.1515 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.171/2020 OF KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION , ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.** ## **PETITIONERS:** **1 SHAIJU @ SAJU, AGED 38 YEARS S/O. BABU, KOCHU PARAMBIL, PATHIYOOR EAST, PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.** **2 SARATH @ JITHU AGED 35 YEARS S/O. SOMARAJAN, SHOBHALAYAM, ERUVA EAST, ERUVA P. O., PATHIYOOR VILLAGE.** ## **BY ADV. SRI.K.R.SUNIL** ## **RESPONDENT:** ## **THE STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.** ## **BY SRI.SANTHOSH PETER, SR.GP** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 2 ## **O R D E R** **Dated this the 20th 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.171 of 2020 of Kareelakulangara Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 341, 324, 308 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).** **3. The prosecution case is that, on 15.2.2020 at about 5 p.m., the petitioners attacked one Reji Kumar with dangerous weapons in connection with a pathway dispute.** **4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor.** **5. The learned counsel for the petitioners** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 3 **submitted that, it is a case and counter case. The counsel submitted that, the petitioners produced Annexure A1 and Annexure A2 F.I.Rs. in Crime Nos. 171 of 2020 and 164 of 2020 of Kareelakulangara Police Station. The F.I.R. in the present case is Annexure A1. The counter case is registered at first because the number of the counter case is 164 of 2020 and the present case is 171 of 2020. The offence alleged in Annexure A2 F.I.R includes an offence under Section 326 IPC. Of course, there is an offence under Section 308 IPC in Annexure A1 F.I.R. also. The counsel submitted that, the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court is granting bail to the petitioners.** **6. The learned public prosecutor opposed this bail application. The public prosecutor submitted that, the injured sustained very serious injury. The public prosecutor submitted that, the presence of the petitioners are necessary for completing the investigation.** **7. After hearing both sides, I think, this** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 4 **bail application can be allowed, on stringent conditions. There is allegation and counter allegation about the same incident. The injured in both cases sustained injury. Annexure A1 is the F.I.R in the present case and Annexure A2 is the F.I.R. in the other case. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that, there is a dispute with respect of a pathway and there is a civil suit is also pending. I do not want to make any observation about the merit of this case. The alleged incident happened on 15.2.2020. This bail application is pending before this Court from 25.2.2020. There is an interim order restraining the Police in arresting the petitioners for a period of two weeks from 19.3.2020. At this distance of time, it is improper to send the petitioners to jail. The petitioners can be directed to 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** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 5 **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.** **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** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 6 **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 cooperate 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** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 7 **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 distancing in the wake of Covid 19** ## **pandemic;** ## **7. If any of the above** **conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional** B.A. NO.1515 OF 2020 8 **Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.** **Sd/-** **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **pkk** **JUDGE**