Kerala High Court
Shahnas Alias Haris vs State Of Kerala on 7 May, 2021
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.3473 OF 2021
CRIME NO.373/2021 OF Kilimanoor Police Station ,
Thiruvananthapuram
PETITIONER/S:
SHAHNAS ALIAS HARIS
AGED 23 YEARS
SHIBINA MANZIL, KALLUKUZHY,
UMAYANALLOORE, THAZUTHALA VILLAGE,
KOLLAM 691589
691589
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.R.SASITH
SMT.R.K.CHIRUTHA
SMT.RAJITHA V.K
SMT.APARNA NARAYAN MENON
SRI.A.V.ARUN PRAKASH
SMT.NEELANJANA NAIR
SHRI.AGHIL RAJ K.
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
682031
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.P.P.SRI.C.N.PRABHAKARAN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3473/2021
..2..
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3473 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 petitioner is the accused in crime No.373/2021
of Kilimanoor Police Station. He is the 2 nd accused in the
above case. The above case is registered against the
petitioner and other alleging offence punishable under
Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that on 27.03.2021 at about
02.45hrs at Malayamadam temple road, accused 1 and 2
snatched the gold chain weighing 5½ sovereign worth Rs.
1,70,000/- of the defacto complainant who was travelling as
pillion rider in a motorcycle.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
B.A.No.3473/2021
..3..
the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner
is not correct and he has not committed any offence. The
counsel submitted that he is in custody from 31.03.2021 and
he is ready to abide by any conditions, if this Court grant him
bail. The counsel also submitted that there is no criminal
antecedents to the petitioner and he is arrayed as an accused
in a criminal case for the first time. The learned Public
Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application and
submitted that the petitioner may not be released on bail at
this stage.
5. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is
very serious. But the petitioner is in custody from 31.03.2021
onwards. The petitioner is aged only 23 years. Considering
the entire facts and circumstances, I think this Bail
Application can be allowed on stringent conditions. If the
petitioner is involved in any other case in which similar
offences are alleged, the Investigating Officer is free to file an
application before the Jurisdictional Court to cancel the bail
B.A.No.3473/2021
..4..
and the Jurisdictional Court can pass appropriate orders
thereon.
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 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
B.A.No.3473/2021
..5..
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. The 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.
B.A.No.3473/2021
..6..
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. The petitioner shall not leave
India without permission of the
jurisdictional Court.
4. The petitioner shall not commit
any offence similar to the offence alleged in
this case.
5. The petitioner shall strictly abide
by the various guidelines issued by the
State Government and Central Government
B.A.No.3473/2021
..7..
with respect to keeping of social distancing
in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic.
6. 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
kkj
