IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 17TH VAISAKHA, 1943
Bail Appl..No.3606 OF 2021
CRIME NO.578/2021 OF Nedumangad Police Station ,
Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/S:
1 RAJESH KUMAR
AGED 33 YEARS
RENTED HOUSE AT CHENCHERIKONATHU VEEDU, PALLIVILA,
VATTAPPARA P.O, FROM ROOPU NIVAS, PANTHUKALATHIL,
CHERIYAKONNI, ARUVIKKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695028
2 SUMESH
AGED 38 YEARS
LEKSHAM VEEDU, KARUVILA, KONDUNGANOOR,
VATTIYOORKAVU P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695013
BY ADV. SMT.M.SANTHI (K/868/2011)
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
682031
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT:
P.P.SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No. 3606 of 2021 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3606 of 2021
-------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of May, 2021
ORDER
This Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.
2. The petitioners are the accused in crime No. 578/2021 of Nedumangad Police Station. They are the accused Nos. 3 and 4 in the above case. Above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Secs. 143, 147, 148, 149, 294(b), 324, 506, 447, 452, 326 and 307 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that on 26.02.2021 at about 2 pm, the accused in prosecution of their common object formed themselves into an unlawful assembly committed riot with deadly weapons. It is also alleged that the accused criminally trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and assaulted him. The petitioners are arrested on 10.3.2021.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the B.A.No. 3606 of 2021 3 petitioners are 3rd and 4th accused and there is no serious overtact attributed to the petitioners. The counsel submitted that the petitioners are in custody from 10.3.2021 onwards. The counsel submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grant them bail. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor conceded that no criminal antecedents reported against the petitioners.
5. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is true that the allegations against the petitioners are very serious. But considering the period of detention and also considering the fact that no criminal antecedents reported against the petitioners, I think this bail application can be allowed.
6. Moreover, the 2nd wave of COVID-19 is spreading in the country and the citizens are facing serious difficulties. In the state of Kerala, the 2nd wave of the pandemic is creating lot of problems and even the day-to-day life of the citizens are affected. Everyday, about 25,000 people are tested positive with COVID-19. In such circumstances, this Court has to consider this fact also while considering bail applications. The life is more important than anything. Therefore, I am considering this bail application based on B.A.No. 3606 of 2021 4 the above pandemic situation.
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. These happened during the 1 st wave of COVID-19 season.
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 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. Petitioners shall be released on bail on B.A.No. 3606 of 2021 5 executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
2. The 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
3. Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4. Petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence alleged in this case.
5. The petitioners 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. 3606 of 2021 6
6. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner/s, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS