High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2020-05-05Bail granted to the petitioner on stringent con...

Vanamohanan v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:BA NO.2563 OF 2020

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P. V. Kunhikrishnan
Judgment Date: 2020-05-05
Court Decision / Holding: Bail Application allowed. The petitioner is to be released on bail subject to strict conditions: (1) self bond and bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties; (2) furnish post-release address and phone number; (3) the jail authorities must forward the bail bond to the jurisdictional court; (4) the petitioner must report to the Station House Officer after release and provide residence details; (5) appearance before the Investigating Officer as required and co-operation with the investigation; (6) comply with court directions and avoid witness tampering or interference; (7) adhere to government COVID-19 social distancing guidelines; (8) breach of any condition allows cancellation of bail; (9) the petitioner shall not enter the Nenmara Police Station jurisdiction until the final report is submitted unless directed otherwise by court or IO.
Final Disposition: Bail granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions (as detailed in the order).

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Vanamohanan

Respondents

State of Kerala, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam-31

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• T.K. Sandeep

Counsels for Respondents

• P.P. Sri Ajith Murali & Santosh Peter (Sr)

Case Synopsis & Summary

This bail petition concerns Vanamohanan, accused in Crime No.108 of 2020 registered at Nenmara Police Station, Palakkad, alleging offences under Sections 450, 375(b), 376 IPC. The petition, heard via video conference on 05.05.2020, seeks bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The prosecution contends the offence is serious and opposes release; the petitioner has been in custody for about 53 days and familial enmity with the victim is alleged, with civil disputes noted but not detailed. The court, after hearing both sides, finds that the accused can be released on bail subject to stringent conditions, considering the close proximity of the two families and the ongoing investigation. The judge also references public health considerations amid the COVID-19 pandemic, citing Supreme Court practice directions and a Kerala High Court Full Bench, to minimize prison populations. The bail order imposes a comprehensive set of conditions: the accused must execute a self bond, provide a bail bond with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each, supply current address and contact information, report to police after release, appear before the Investigating Officer as required, not tamper with witnesses, and strictly comply with social distancing and related guidelines. The order also prohibits entry into the Nenmara Police Station jurisdiction until final report submission, unless otherwise directed by the investigating officer or court.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of Cr.P.C.Sections 450, 375(b), 376 IPCSection 441 Cr.P.C.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Bail is the rule and jail is the exception

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that (i) he has already spent around 53 days in custody and the distance between the petitioner’s and the victim’s houses is not far, (ii) there is a civil dispute between the families resulting in a false case, and (iii) circumstances, including court-ordered social distancing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, justify grant of bail with stringent conditions. The counsel for the petitioner emphasizes the general principle that bail is the rule and imprisonment is the exception, and asserts that final stages of investigation favor bail with conditions to secure a fair trial while preventing witness tampering or interference.

Contentions of Respondents

The learned Public Prosecutor opposes bail, arguing that the offences alleged are grave (covering trespass, criminal force to compel sexual intercourse, and aggravated activity under IPC) and that releasing the accused could jeopardize the investigation and safety of the victim. The prosecution stresses seriousness of the offences and the need to maintain the integrity of the investigation, especially given the likely social tensions and proximity of the parties.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020)	Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.1 of 2020	Positive	Cited to justify social distancing and other directives in prison settings as a factor in granting bail to reduce prison populations during COVID-19.
W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020	W.P(C) No.9400 of 2020	Positive	Full Bench directions cited regarding minimizing inmate numbers and social distancing, influencing bail considerations.
Chidambaram. P v Directorate of Enforcement	2019 (16) SCALE 870	Positive	Used to state the basic jurisprudence that bail is the rule and jail the exception to ensure fair trial.

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 Vanamohanan 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 05TH DAY OF MAY 2020 / 15TH VAISAKHA, 1942** **BA NO.2563 OF 2020** (Crime No.108/2020 of Nenmara Police Station, Palakkad Dist) ## PETITIONER/Accused: Vanamohanan, Aged 43 years, S/o.Kittu, Pulikkalchiara House, Ayilur, Palakkad. By Adv.T.K.Sandeep Vs. ## RESPONDENT/Complainant & State State of Kerala, represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam-31. ## BY P.P.SRI.AJITH MURALI & SANTHOSH PETER(SR) **THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.05.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 2 ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J** -------------------------------- ## B.A.No.2563 of 2020 ------------------------------Dated this the 5[th] day of May, 2020 ## **O R D E R** This Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference. 2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.108 of 2020 of Nenmara Police Station registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 450, 375(b), 376 of IPC. Petitioner was arrested on 13.03.2020 and he is in custody. 3. The prosecution case is that on 12.03.2020 at about 12.00 hrs when the victim lady was alone at her house, the accused trespassed in to her house and forcefully made her lie on bed and kissed her on her private parts and thereafter inserted his finger on her B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 3 ## vagina 4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody for the last 53 days. He also contended that the house of the victim is situated adjacent to the house of the petitioner. There is a civil dispute between the family of the petitioner and the family of the victim, because of the enmity a false case is foisted against him. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application saying that this is a serious offence committed by the petitioner and he opposed the release of the petitioner. 6. After hearing both sides, according to me the petitioner can be released on bail on stringent conditions. It is an admitted case that the petitioner and the victim are residing closely. The counsel for the petitioner alleged in the bail application that there is a civil dispute between the family of the petitioner and the family of the victim. B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 4 Of course, no details are mentioned in the bail application. Moreover, the investigating is also in the final stage. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. 7. 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. 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 B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 5 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. 9. 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 Superintendent of Jail concerned where the petitioner is incarcerated is directed to release the petitioner on bail on executing a self bond ensuring that he will appear before the Court concerned as and when required, if he is not in detention in any other case. It is further directed that the Superintendent of Jail should get the bail bond from the petitioner as stipulated in Section 441 B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 6 Cr.P.C. 2. The Superintendent of Jail concerned shall also get the phone number and the address at which the petitioner would be residing after his release. 3. The Superintendent of Jail concerned, immediately after release of the petitioner will forthwith forward the bail bond obtained from the petitioner to the jurisdictional Court. 4. The petitioner immediately after release from the prison, report before the Station House Officer of the Jurisdictional Police Station and shall furnish his phone number and the place where he is going to reside. The Station House Officer concerned shall keep a vigil on the whereabouts of the petitioner and shall ensure that the B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 7 petitioner do not violate the terms of the undertaking. 5. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not threaten or attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence. 6. The petitioner shall within one week from the commencement of the functioning of the jurisdictional court, if the court is not functioning at present, execute 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. 7. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State B.A.NO.2563 OF 2020 8 Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social distancing and other directions in the wake of declared lock-down. 8. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance with law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. 9. The petitioner shall not enter the jurisdiction of the Nenmara Police Station, till the final report of the above case is submitted before the Court, unless a notice is received from the Investigating Officer or from the Court. Sd/- ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE** VPK