High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeBail granted with conditions to the petitioners

Siby Thomas and Aswathykutty v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BA Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830 of 2022, 3368 of 2022, 3869 of 2022, 3881 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P. V. Kunhikrishnan
Judgment Date
2023-07-04
Court Decision / Holding
The bail applications are allowed. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days for interrogation. If the IO proposes to arrest them, they shall be released on bail on bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties each. Petitioners shall appear as required, cooperate with the investigation, not induce witnesses, not leave India without permission, and not commit similar offences. Violation may result in cancellation of bail.
Final Disposition
Bail granted with conditions to the petitioners

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Siby Thomas
  • Aswathykutty

Respondents

  • State of Kerala
  • Ligimol
  • Albin Mathew

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Latheesh Sebastian

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

Five connected bail applications (BA Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830 of 2022, 3368 of 2022, 3869 of 2022 and 3881 of 2022) were disposed by a common judgment of the Kerala High Court on 4 July 2023, by Justice P. V. Kunhikrishnan. The petitioners—Siby Thomas and Aswathykutty—are accused in multiple cases registered at Thodupuzha Police Station and later under investigation by the Kanjur police, under offences punishable under IPC sections 420, 465, 468 and 471. The prosecution alleges that the de facto complainant lent money and provided blank cheque leaves as security, and that the cheques dishonoured at the bank triggered criminal complaints. These petitions had been pending since 2022; the petitioners’ counsel urged bail on grounds of pendency and on the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is ongoing and that petitioners may surrender before the IO; if arrest is necessary, bail can be granted on appropriate conditions. Relying on Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement, the court reaffirmed the bail principle and granted bail with conditions: petitioners to appear before the IO within ten days, undergo interrogation, and, if arrest is contemplated, be released on bail on bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties; conditions include cooperation, no inducement to witnesses, and no travel abroad without permission. The petitioners are granted bail accordingly.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 420 IPCSection 465 IPCSection 468 IPCSection 471 IPC

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Bail is the rule and jail is the exception.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the investigation is at a preliminary stage and that bail is the general rule with jail as the exception. Pendency since 2022, and in BA 4323 at least one petitioner having been arrested and released on bail, are noted. The petitioners argue there is no immediate risk of flight or tampering with witnesses and that continued detention would hamper fair trial. They propose surrender before the IO within ten days, with bail on a bond and two sureties, and compliance with conditions including cooperation, non-inducement of witnesses, no travel abroad without permission, and refraining from committing similar offences. They request that reasonable conditions be imposed to enable ongoing investigation and fair trial.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is ongoing and that petitioners may be directed to surrender before the IO to facilitate completion of the inquiry. If arrest is necessary, bail can still be granted on suitable conditions. Emphasis is placed on maintaining the integrity of the investigation and the possibility of a fair trial, while balancing the presumption of innocence with public interest. The offences under IPC sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 are treated as sufficiently serious to warrant careful consideration of bail, under the circumstances.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement2019 (16) SCALE 870PositiveCited as the controlling principle that, in bail jurisprudence, the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, guiding the court to grant bail to the petitioners.

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 Siby Thomas and Aswathykutty 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 ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3368 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` SIBY THOMAS, AGED 38 YEARS AREEPLAVAN HOUSE, ELLUMPURAM KARA, MUTTOM, IDUKKI DISTRICT., PIN - 685587 ``` ``` BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.MAYA M.N. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1830/2022, 4323/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -2- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 1830 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` SIBY THOMAS AGED 38 YEARS AREEPLAVAN HOUSE, ELLUMPURAM KARA, MUTTOM, THODUPUZHA, PIN - 685584 ``` ``` BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.MAYA M.N. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3368/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -3- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 4323 OF 2021 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` 1SIBY THOMAS,AGED 37 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, AGED 37 YEARS, AREEPLAVAN HOUSE, ELLUMPURAM KARA, MUTTOM P.O., MUTTOM, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685584. IDUKKI, PIN - 685584 2ASWATHYKUTTY.K.,AGED 32 YEARS D/O CHANDRABOSE K.S., AGED 32 YEARS, KIZHAKKETHURUTHIL HOUSE, MELUKAVU MATTOM KARA, MELUKAVU VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686652. KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686652 BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN 1STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 2LIGIMOL, AGED 32 YEARS W/O ALBIN MATHEW, MOOKKANTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, CHILAVU P.O., KARIMANNOOR, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685588. 3ALBIN MATHEW,AGED 35 YEARS, S/O MATHEW, MOOKKANTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, CHILAVU P.O., KARIMANNOOR, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685588. BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.MAYA M.N. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3368/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -4- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN`** ``` TUESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3869 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` ASWATHYKUTTY, AGED 32 YEARS DAUGHTER OF CHANDRABOSS, RESIDING KIZHAKKETHURUTHIL HOUSE, MELUKAVU MATTOM P.O, MENACHIL TALUK,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 696652 BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.MAYA M.N. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3368/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -5- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 13TH ASHADHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3881 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` ASWATHIKUTTY AGED 32 YEARS DAUGHTER OF CHANDRABOSS, RESIDING KIZHAKKETHURUTHIL HOUSE, MELUKAVU MATTOM P.O, MENACHIL TALUK,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 696652 BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.MAYA M.N. ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.07.2023, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..3368/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -6- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.** ====================================================== B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ============================================================= Dated this the 4[th] day of July, 2023 ## **ORDER** These bail applications are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these bail applications by a common judgment. 2. The petitioners in these bail applications are accused in Crime Nos. 568 of 2021, 455 of 2022, 10 of 2022, 734 of 2022 and 702 of 2022 of Thodupuzha police station. It is submitted that now the case is investigating by the Kanjur police station. All these cases are registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that the _de facto_ complainant borrowed money from the accused and the _de facto_ complainant issued blank cheque leaves as security. Subsequently, the accused presented the cheque leaves to the bank and thereafter a compliant was filed alleging that the same was dishonoured. -7- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 4. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. 5. These bail applications are pending before this Court from 2022 onwards. It is submitted that the 1[st] petitioner in BA No.4323 of 2021 is already arrested and subsequently released on bail. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that he is not pressing the bail application of the 1[st] petitioner in BA No.4323 of 2021. 6. As far as the other cases are concerned, I think the petitioners can be directed to surrender before the investigating officer. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation is going on. If that be so, the petitioners can be directed to surrender before the investigating officer so that the investigation can be completed. If the arrest of the petitioners are necessary, there can be a direction to release them on bail. 7. 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** -8- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 **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. 8. 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. 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 on 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. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any -9- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; 4. Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court; 5. 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. 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. sd/- ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **JUDGE** das -10- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1830/2022`** |`PETITIONER`|`ANNEXURES`| |---|---| |`Annexure1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME`| ||`NO.10/2022 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION`| |`Annexure2`|`TRUE COPY OF MONEY LENDING LICENCE OF`| ||`THE PETITIONER`| |`Annexure3`|`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DETAILS`| ||`GIVEN BY THE WIFE OF THE DEFACTO`| ||`COMPLAINANT`| |`Annexure4`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN APPLICATION DATED`| ||`09.12.2019`| |`Annexure5`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LOAN ACCOUNT STATEMENT`| |`Annexure6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE CHEQUE ISSUED BY THE`| ||`WIFE OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT DATED`| ||`25.07.2020`| |`Annexure7`|`TRUE COPY OF THE DISHONOUR MEMO`| |`Annexure8`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED`| ||`18.08.2020`| |`Annexure9`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD`| |`Annexure10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT IN C.C`| ||`NO.657/2020 OF CJM COURT, THODUPUZHA`| -11- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3869/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1TRUE COPY OF THE CITIZEN COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 734 /2022 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION ``` -12- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3881/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1TRUE COPY OF THE CITIZEN COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO. 702 /2022 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION ``` -13- B.A.Nos. 4323 of 2021, 1830, 3368, 3869 & 3881 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3368/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 455/2022 OF THODUPUZHA POLICE STATION ```