Kerala High Court
Krishnaprasad @ Prasad vs State Of Kerala on 15 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 25TH POUSHA, 1942
Bail Appl..No.290 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMA 3723/2020 DATED 02-12-2020 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,ALATHUR
CRIME NO.1026/2020 OF Alathur Police Station , Palakkad
PETITIONER:
KRISHNAPRASAD @ PRASAD,
AGED 38 YEARS, SON OF ARUMUGHAN, MALLAMPARAMBU VEEDU,
PAZHAMBALAKKODE, TARUR VILLAGE, ALATHUR TALUK,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
PIN-678645
BY ADV. SRI.BABY MATHEW
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PIN-682031
SRI.K.B.UDAYAKUMAR, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.290 of 2021 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.290 of 2021
--------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of January, 2021
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal
Procedure Code .
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1026 of 2020 of
Alathur Police Station, Palakkad. The above case is registered
against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under
Sections 450, 354, 354A(1)(i)(ii)(2), 354B, 511 of 376 IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that on 18.11.2020 at 8 p.m,
the accused criminally trespassed into the house of the de
facto complainant at Kuttankode, Tarur, used criminal force,
disrobed her, attempted to commit rape and thereby
committed the offence. The petitioner was arrested on
26.11.2020.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is in custody from 26.11.2020. The counsel
submitted that even if the entire allegations are accepted, the
offence under Section 511 of 376 IPC is not made out. The
counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any
conditions, if this Court grant him bail.
6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. But
the Public Prosecutor submitted that if this Court is granting
bail, stringent conditions may be imposed.
7. After hearing both sides, I think the bail application can
be allowed on stringent conditions. Admittedly, the petitioner is
in custody from 26.11.2020 onwards. It is true that the
allegation against the petitioner is very serious. But the fact
remains that the investigation is in progress. This is the second
bail application filed by the petitioner. The earlier bail
application was withdrawn by the petitioner because this Court
was not inclined to grant bail at that stage.
8. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the
case, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent
conditions.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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 be released on bail on
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each
for the like sum to the satisfaction of the
jurisdictional Court.
2. The 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.
3. Petitioner shall not leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4. 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.
5. The petitioner 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.
6. The petitioner shall not enter the
jurisdictional limit of Alathur Police Station till
investigation in Crime No.1026 of 2020 is over.
7. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on all Mondays at 10 am
till final report is filed. For the purpose of
appearance before the investigating officer, the
petitioner can enter the jurisdictional limit of
Alathur Police Station.
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
cms
