Suresh Babu v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 21ST ASWINA, 1942** ## **Bail Appl..No.6383 OF 2020** **CRIME NO.1151/2020 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA** ## **PETITIONER/ACCUSED:** **SURESH BABU AGED 52 YEARS, KANNEKERIL, WARD NO.2, AROOR P O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688534** **BY ADVS. SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR SMT.C.A.RAKHI ANTONY SRI.GEORGE BRISTON SRI.V.P.PRASANTH** ## **RESPONDENT:** **STATE OF KERALA** **REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA 682031** ## **R1 BY SRI.AJITH MURALI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR** ## **OTHER PRESENT: ADV.SRI.SAYED M.THANGAL FOR THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT** **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 2** ## **O R D E R** ## **Dated this the 13th day of October 2020** … **This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) was heard through Video Conference.** **2. The petitioner is the 1[st] accused in Crime No.1151 of 2020 of Aroor Police Station, Alappuzha District. The above case is registered against the petitioner and other accused alleging offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 326, 506 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).** **3. The prosecution case is that, on 16.08.2020, at about 4.30 p.m., while the defacto complainant was engaged in levelling footpath situated in 2[nd] Ward of Aroor Panchayath, abutting the compound wall of the accused, the 2[nd] accused caught hold on the neck of the defacto complainant's mother, slapped on her face and abused her. When the defacto complainant attempted to save her, the 2[nd] accused beat on his** ## **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 3** **left elbow and he fell down. Then, the 1[st] accused beat on the left elbow of the defacto complainant by using a spade and the same caused fracture. It is alleged that, the accused together attacked the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant sustained a fracture.** **4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned public prosecutor. The defacto complainant appeared through the counsel Sri.Sayed M. Thangal. I heard the counsel for the defacto complainant also.** **5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the incident is not happened as alleged by the prosecution. The counsel submitted that, it is a case and counter case. The counsel submitted that, the counter case is registered as Crime No.1153 of 2020 in the same police station in which the offences alleged are under Sections 341, 323, 294(b), 354, 506(i) r/w. Section 34 IPC and Sections 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.** ## **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 4** **The counsel submitted that, the petitioner is ready** **to abide any conditions, if this Court is granting him bail.** **6. The learned counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that, the defacto complainant sustained very serious injuries. The counsel also submitted that, the injured was in the intensive care unit. The counsel submitted that, the petitioner may not be granted bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.** **7. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed this bail application. The public prosecutor submitted that, the defacto complainant sustained grievous hurt.** **8. After hearing both sides, I think, this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. There is allegation and counter allegation about the same incident. The petitioner says that the incident happened in a particular manner and the defacto complainant says that it is in an another manner. This Court cannot consider the same while considering this bail application. It is a matter to be** ## **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 5** **investigated by the investigating officer.** **Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, this bail application is allowed on stringent conditions.** **9. 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.** **10. 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** ## **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 6** **ensure that, the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.** **11. 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 petitioner 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 petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;** **3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required.** ## **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 7** **The petitioner shall 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 petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the Court;** **5. The 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;** **6. The petitioner 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;** **B.A. NO.6383 OF 2020 8** **7. If any of the above conditions** **are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.** **Sd/-** **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **pkk** **JUDGE**