Sree Vishnu v. State of Kerala

BA No.5172 of 2025 1 ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` TUESDAY, THE 8[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ``` BAIL APPL. NO. 5172 OF 2025 ``` ``` CRIME NO.90/2025 OF Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.3078 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ``` ``` PETITIONER( S )/ACCUSED NO.1: SREEVISHNU AGED 27 YEARS, S/O RAMAKRISHNA, NELLISSERY HOUSE, PARIYARAM P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 721 ``` ``` BY ADVS. P.K.VARGHESE M.T.SAMEER DHANESH V.MADHAVAN JERRY MATHEW ANU ASHOKAN DEVIKA K.R. SAWPARNIKA RAJU ``` ## **`RESPONDENT( S )/COMPLAINANT:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 ``` ``` BY ADV.: ``` ``` SR PP - HRITHWIK C S ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` BA No.5172 of 2025 2 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:30199` **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------BA No.5172 of 2025 -------------------------------------------Dated this the 08[th] day of April, 2025** ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. 2. The petitioner is the 1[st] accused in Crime No.90/2025 of Chalakkudy Police Station, Thrissur. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2) and 109 r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 3. The prosecution case is that, on BA No.5172 of 2025 3 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` 25.01.2025 at about 10.30 PM, when the procession of Pariyaram Church was going on, the defacto complainant and his friends Amar and Joyal had a scuffle with accused Nos.1 and 2, and due to that enmity, accused Nos.1 and 2 called accused Nos.3 to 10 to the scene for attacking the defacto complainant and thereafter, the 3[rd] accused stabbed the defacto complainant and his friends using a knife and the other accused persons fisted and stamped them. It is alleged that accused Nos.11 and 12 also participated in the incident. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted BA No.5172 of 2025 4 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` that the petitioner is in custody from 22.02.2025. The counsel also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court, if this Court grant him bail. 6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 7. The petitioner earlier filed a bail application before this Court as BA No.3078/2025. After hearing both sides, this Court was not inclined to grant bail. At that stage, the counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw the bail application with liberty to file it again. This Court granted liberty to file the bail application after four weeks. Accordingly, the present bail application is filed. Admittedly, the co-accused were already released on bail. Considering the BA No.5172 of 2025 5 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the period of detention, I think, the petitioner also can be released on bail after imposing stringent conditions. 8. 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 in as much 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. 9. Moreover, in _**Jalaluddin Khan v. Union**_ BA No.5172 of 2025 6 ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## _**of India** [2024 KHC 6431],_ the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must mention here that the Special Court and the High Court did not consider the material in the charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the appellant's case could not be properly appreciated. When a case is made out for a grant of bail, the Courts should not have any hesitation in granting bail. The allegations of the prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in a case like the present case where there are stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with only modifcation that the bail can be granted if the conditions in the statute are satisfed. The rule also means that once a case is made out for the grant of bail, the Court BA No.5172 of 2025 7 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:30199` cannot decline to grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our Constitution.” (underline supplied) ## 10. In _**Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of**_ ## _**Enforcement**_ [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “53. The Court further observed that, over a period of time, the trial courts and the High Courts have forgotten a very well - settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. From our experience, we can say that it appears that the trial courts and the High Courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception is, at times, followed in breach. On account of non - grant of bail even in straight forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial courts and the High Courts should recognize the principle that BA No.5172 of 2025 8 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` "bail is rule and jail is exception".” Considering the dictum laid down in the above decisions and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following conditions: _1. Petitioner shall be released on bail_ _on 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_ _jurisdictional Court._ _2. 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_ BA No.5172 of 2025 9 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` _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._ _3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court._ _4. 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._ _5. The observations and findings in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this bail application. The_ BA No.5172 of 2025 10 **==> picture [57 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30199 ``` _principle laid down by this Court in_ _**Anzar Azeez v. State of Kerala**_ _[2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260] is applicable in this case also._ _6. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance_ `w` _ith law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. The prosecution is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of the above condition._ **Sd/-** nvj **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE**