Kerala High Court
Dibin C 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. 2969 OF 2024
CRIME NO.141/2024 OF CHERUPUZHA POLICE STATION, Kannur
PETITIONER(S):
DIBIN C,
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O.DASAN, MALIVACHAL HOUSE, MUNDERI AMSOM,
EACHUR DESOM, KANNUR, PIN - 670591
BY ADV K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN
RESPONDENT(S):
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SMT.C. SEENA, 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.2969 of 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.2969 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.141/2024 of Cherupuzha Police Station, Kannur District. The above case is registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 18.02.2024 at 08.30 P.M., S.I of Police, Cherupuzha and party while on patrolling duty had seen large quantity of explosive substances such as gelatin sticks, detonators etc. in the compound of Majitha Stone Crusher at Choorappadavu, Vayakkara. After examination of the article by the bomb squad, they confirmed that they are explosive substances and seized the same. Hence the case was B.A.No.2969 of 2024 3 registered. The petitioner was implicated subsequently stating that he executed an agreement with the original owner who has got license.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out against the petitioner who is subsequently implicated as an accused. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the Bail application.
6. After hearing both sides, I think this Bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The petitioner can be directed to appear before the Investigating officer once in a week till final report is filed.
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), B.A.No.2969 of 2024 4 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 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 B.A.No.2969 of 2024 5 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 the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;
6. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays at 10 A.M. till final report is filed.
7. 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 B.A.No.2969 of 2024 6 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].
8. 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.2969 of 2024 7 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2969/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.141/2024 OF CHERUPUZHA POLICE STATION DATED 19.02.2024.
ANNEXURE A2 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED NIL FILED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUPUZHA POLICE STATION IMPLICATING THE PETITIONER AS 2ND ACCUSED.
ANNEXURE A3 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT MADE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERUPUZHA POLICE STATION IN THE REGISTER OF THE COMPANY BEARING THE LICENSE NUMBER K/KL/KNR/LE3/15E(103508).
ANNEXURE A4 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMPLAINT
RECEIVED UNDER THE RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT GIVEN BY THE SUNITHA K.P. TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 24.03.2023 ANNEXURE A5 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SESSIONS COURT, THALASSERY IN CRL.MC.536/2024 DATED 02.04.2024. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE