High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeApplication allowed; bail granted to the petiti...

Vinod v. State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:424 of 2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C.S. Dias, J.
Judgment Date
2024-01-29
Court Decision / Holding
The application is allowed; the petitioner Vinod is to be released on bail on a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties of equal amount. Conditions: (i) appearance before the Investigating Officer every Saturday for two months or until final report; (ii) no inducement or tampering with witnesses; (iii) no commission of any offence while on bail; (iv) surrender of passport if any; (v) court may cancel or modify bail for breach; (vi) IO may investigate and recover with liberty to act on information provided by the petitioner, as per Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another; (vii) further conditions as deemed necessary by the court.
Final Disposition
Application allowed; bail granted to the petitioner.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Vinod

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • M.B. Shyni
  • • U. Jayakrishnan
  • • Rajesh Kumar R.
  • • V.R. Anilkumar
  • • Sarafudheen T.

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Smt.Seetha.S, Senior Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

Vinod, aged 43, the sole accused in Crime No. 3/2024 of the Aryanad Excise Range, moves bail under Section 439 CrPC before the Kerala High Court, Ernakulam. He is charged with offences under Sections 8(1), 8(2) and 67B of the Kerala Abkari Act for allegedly transporting one litre of illicit arrack on 1 January 2024 on a motorcycle KL 21/A 6181. The prosecution’s case rests on seizure of the contraband; the petitioner contends innocence and claims he has been falsely implicated. He has been in judicial custody since 1 January 2024, with the investigation stated to be complete and recovery effected. The Public Prosecutor concedes those facts and notes the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. After weighing these factors, the court finds that ongoing detention is unnecessary and grants bail on a bond of Rs 50,000 with two solvent sureties for similar amounts. Conditions include: weekly appearance before the Investigating Officer for two months or until the final report is submitted; prohibition on inducing witnesses or tampering with evidence; prohibition on commission of any offence while on bail; surrender of any passport; and a clause permitting cancellation or modification of bail for breach. The order also cites Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another to justify police investigation during bail. The decision is delivered by Justice C.S. Dias, in a single-judge format.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Sections 8(1), 8(2) and 67B of the Kerala Abkari Act

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends innocence and asserts that he has been falsely implicated. He has been in judicial custody since 01.01.2024; investigation is complete and recovery has been effected; thus continued detention is unnecessary and bail should be granted.

Contentions of Respondents

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail but conceded the petitioner’s custody since 01.01.2024, recovery has been effected, and that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents; the risk is minimal but safeguards are necessary.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another2020 (1) KHC 663PositiveCited to justify that investigations and recoveries may proceed even while the accused is on bail, following the principle laid down by the Supreme Court and applied here.

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 Vinod 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.

1 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 9TH MAGHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 424 OF 2024 ``` ``` CRIME NO.3/2024 OF Aryanad Excise Range Office, ``` ``` Thiruvananthapuram ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` VINOD AGED 43 YEARS S/O. RAMABHADRAN,M VISHNU BHAVAN, KANJIRAMMOODU, PALLIVETTA, PAZHAYATHERUVUMURI,ARYANAD,THIRUVANANTHPAURAM NOW RESIDING AT THADATHARIKATHUVEEDU, MANNARAM, KOTTAYKKAKOMMURI, ARYANAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695541 BY ADVS. M.B.SHYNI U.JAYAKRISHNAN RAJESH KUMAR R. V.R.ANILKUMAR SARAFUDHEEN T. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SMT.SEETHA.S SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ``` ``` THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 ## **C.S.DIAS,J** ## **======================** **Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 ----------------------------------Dated this the 29[th] day of January, 2024** ## **O R D E R** The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in crime No.3/2024 of the Aryanad Excise Range Office, Thiruvananthapuram, registered against him, for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Secs 8(1), 8(2) and 67B of the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner was arrested on 1.1.2024. 2. The gist of the prosecution case is that: around 11.15 a.m on 1.1.2024, the accused was found transporting one litre of illicit arrack in his motor cycle bearing 3 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 registration No.KL 21/A 6181. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences. 3. Heard; Smt.M.B Shyni, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Seetha.S, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 1.1.2024. The investigation in the case is complete and recovery has been effected. The petitioner’s continued detention is unnecessary. Hence, the petitioner may be released on bail. 4 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. Nonetheless, she conceded to the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 1.1.2024, the recovery has been effected and the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. 6. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the materials placed on record, particularly taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 1.1.2024, that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents, that the recovery has been effected and investigation in the case is practically complete, I am of the view that petitioner’s continued detention is not necessary. Hence, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 5 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 In the result, the application is allowed, by directing the petitioner to be released on bail on him 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 court having jurisdiction, which shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Saturday between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m for a period of two months or till the final report is laid, whichever is earlier. He shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; (ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from 6 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 disclosing such facts to the court or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in any manner, whatsoever; (iii) The petitioner shall not commit any offence while he is on bail; (iv) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the court below at the time of execution of the bond. If he has no passport, he shall file an affidavit to the effect before the court below on the date of execution of the bond; (v) In case of violation of any of the conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law. (vi) Applications for deletion/modification of the bail conditions shall be moved and entertained by the court below. 7 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 (vii) Needless to mention, it would be well within the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the information, if any, given by the petitioner even while the petitioner is on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi) and another** [2020 (1) KHC 663]. sd/- sks/29.1.2024 **C.S.DIAS, JUDGE** 8 Bail Application No. 424 of 2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 424/2024`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` ``` Annexure IFREE COPY OF THE ORDER IN C.M.P NO. 108/2024 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I NEDUMANGAD DATED 05/01/2024 ```