Kerala High Court
Harikrishna Prasad.P.V vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 2994 OF 2024
CRIME NO.156/2024 OF CUMBUMMETTU POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
HARIKRISHNA PRASAD.P.V
AGED 28 YEARS
SON OF VIKRAMAN NAIR, PUTHUPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
BALAGRAM (P.O), PRAKASHGRAM KARA, IDUKKI
DISTRICT, PIN - 685552
BY ADV. NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI.PRASHANTH M.P., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.2994 of 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.2994 of 2024
-------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of April, 2024
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)
2. Petitioner is an accused in Crime No.156/2024 of Cumbummettu Police Station, Idukki District. The above case is registered originally under Sections 451, 341, 323, 294(b), and 427 of IPC. The offence under Sections 354 and 354B of IPC was added subsequently.
3. The prosecution case is that, due to the previous animosity towards the defacto complainant, the accused assaulted the victim after wrongfully confining him. It is also alleged that the petitioner outraged the modesty of the victim.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. B.A.No.2994 of 2024 3
5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the offence under Sections 354 and 354B were added subsequently and all other offences are bailable offences. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the Bail application.
6. After hearing both sides, I think this Bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions.
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 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.
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 B.A.No.2994 of 2024 4 following directions:
1. 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 on 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. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. 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. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court;
5. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to B.A.No.2994 of 2024 5 the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;
6. 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].
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 JUDGE DM B.A.No.2994 of 2024 6 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2994/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT IN CRIME NO. 156/2024 OF CUMBUMMETTU POLICE STATION DATED 28.02.2024 ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME NO. 156/2024 OF CUMBUMMETTU POLICE STATION DATED 28.02.2024 ANNEXURE 3 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE CASUALITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE TALUK HOSPITAL, NEDUMKANDAM DATED 27.02.2024 ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 04.03.2024 (WRONGLY MENTIONED THE DATE AS 04.02.2023 IN THE REPORT) SUBMITTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CUMBUMMETTU.
ANNEXURE 5 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.02.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE SISTER OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SHO, CUMBUMMETTU POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE 6 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED
27.02.2024
ANNEXURE 7 FREE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
COURT OF THE SESSIONS JUDGE,
THODUPUZHA DATED 01.04.2024 IN
CRIMINAL M.C NO. 219/2024
ANNEXURE 8 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE OFFER LETTER
DATED 03.04.2024 RECEIVED BY THE
PETITIONER FROM EDU. FUTURE POINT CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITEDRESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE