Vipin K. @ Vipin Ballath, Aneesh K, Bineesh C, Sabin K, Babu T v. State of Kerala

B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 1 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF MAY 2023 / 15TH VAISAKHA, 1945** **BAIL APPL. NO. 2610 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER/S:** 1 VIPIN.K.@ VIPIN BALLATH AGED 34 YEARS SON OF KUNHIRAMAN, R/AT CHERAKKARA HOUSE, P.O.BALLATH, BALLA VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671315 2 ANEESH.K AGED 24 YEARS SON OF PRASAD.K, R/AT KAKKUTHIL HOUSE, CHITHARI.P.O, CHITHARI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671316 3 BINEESH.C AGED 28 YEARS SON OF BALAKRISHNAN.C, R/AT THADATHI LAKSHAM VEEDU, PULLUR, HARIPURAM.P.O, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671531 4 SABIN.K AGED 26 YEARS SON OF RAMAKRISHNAN, R/AT KOVVALPALLY, KANHANGAD SOUTH, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671315 5 BABU.T AGED 42 YEARS SON OF T.LEELA, R/AT THALAPPIL HOUSE, ATHIYAMBOOR, KANHANGAD.P.O, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT., PIN - 671315 BY ADVS. A.ARUNKUMAR B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 2 S.SHYAM KUMAR HEERAKRISHNA T.H. SACHIN GEORGE ARAMBAN ## **RESPONDENT/S:** STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ## **OTHER PRESENT:** SMT.NIMA JACOB-GP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 3 **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -----------------------------------B.A. No. 2610 of 2023 -------------------------------------Dated this the 5[th] day of May, 2023** **O R D E R** This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) 2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No. 388 of 2023 of Hosdurg Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Secs. 143, 145, 147, 148, 324, 332, 353 r/w 149 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that on 19.03.2023 at 4.10 pm, the accused persons and 20 other identifiable persons tried to attack the voters who came to vote in the election to the Kanhangad Co-operative Urban Society B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 4 Director Board at GHSS Hosdurg stating that the election time is over. It is further alleged that when the Police tried to stop the attack, the Police persons were also attacked with stones, wooden stick and chairs. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the abovesaid offences. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not involved in the case. The counsel submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant them bail. The counsel also submitted that no injury is sustained to the police officials to attract Sec.332 IPC. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners obstructed the official duty of the Police and hence, committed the offence under Secs. B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 5 332 and 353 IPC. 6. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that the allegations against the petitioners are very serious. But, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary. The petitioners can be directed to surrender before the investigating officer. The petitioners can also be directed to appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays, till final report is filed. Hence, the bail application can be allowed. 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 870)** , after considering all the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 6 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; B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 7 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 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. The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays at 11.00 am till final report is filed in the above case. 7. If any of the above conditions are violated by the B.A. NO. 2610 OF 2023 8 petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court. Sd/- **P.V.KUNHIKRISHN, JUDGE** **SKS**