Kerala High Court
Josina V.A vs State Of Kerala on 31 July, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:57018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2025 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 8667 OF 2025
CRIME NO.913/2025 OF PALA POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 10.07.2025 IN BAIL APPL.
NO.8124 OF 2025 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
PETITIONER:
JOSINA V.A.,
AGED 35 YEARS,
W/O. MANEESH A M., RESIDING AT AYYAPPANTHATTEL
HOUSE, ADIMALI POST, IDUKKI DISTRICT,
PIN - 685 561.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.MADHU
SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI
SHRI.RENJISH S. MENON
SMT.ALEENA JOSE
SMT.AVANTHIKA R.
SHRI.KARTHIK KRISHNA M.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025
2025:KER:57018
-2-
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025
2025:KER:57018
-3-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of July, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.913 of 2025 of Pala Police Station, Kottayam, registered for the offences punishable under sections 331(4) and 605(a) r/w Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS'). During the course of investigation, the offence under Section 317(2) of BNS has also been incorporated.
3. According to the prosecution, the first accused, who is the husband of the petitioner, had trespassed into the house of the de facto complainant and committed theft of a gold chain weighing 1.5 sovereigns worn by the de facto complainant and another gold chain worn by the minor daughter of the de facto complainant and thereafter handed over one of the gold chains to the second accused, who in turn sold it to a jewellery and thereby the accused committed the offences alleged.
4. I have heard Sri.T.Madhu., the learned counsel for the Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025 2025:KER:57018 -4- petitioner as well as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has been falsely arrayed as an accused and that she has no involvement in the alleged crime.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that her custodial interrogation is necessary.
7. The first accused had committed theft of two gold chains after trespassing into the house of the de facto complainant. One of the gold chains was handed over to the petitioner, who is none other than his wife. Immediately thereafter, petitioner allegedly sold the said gold chain to a jewellery shop at Adimali. The said gold jewellery has already been recovered pursuant to the arrest of the first accused. The second gold chain however has not been recovered. The prosecution has no case for the time being that petitioner had received the second gold chain and what was handed over to the petitioner was the gold chain that has already been recovered.
8. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 (5) SCC 1, it was held that while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail or not, Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case. Grant of anticipatory bail is a matter of discretion and the kind of conditions to Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025 2025:KER:57018 -5- be imposed or not to be imposed are all dependent on facts of each case, and subject to the discretion of the court.
9. In Ashok Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, [2024 SCC OnLine SC 274], it has been held that a mere assertion on the part of the State while opposing the plea for anticipatory bail that custodial interrogation is required would not be sufficient and that the State would have to show or indicate more than prima facie case as to why custodial interrogation of the accused is required for the purpose of investigation.
10. Though the allegations are serious and petitioner prima facie has received a gold chain knowing it to be a stolen property, considering the circumstance that the petitioner is a lady and the gold chain handed over to her has already been recovered, I am of the view that petitioner can be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail on conditions.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 08.08.2025 and shall subject herself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, then, she shall 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 before the Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall also co-operate with the Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025 2025:KER:57018 -6- investigation.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses; nor shall she tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while she is on bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Court having jurisdiction.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE ADS Bail Appl. No.8667 of 2025 2025:KER:57018 -7- APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 8667/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2025 IN CRL.M.C.NO.913/2025 ON THE FILES OF THE SESSION'S COURT KOTTAYAM.
Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2025 IN B.A.NO.8124/2025 ON THE FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.