Kerala High Court
Unnikrishnan 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.3367 OF 2021
CRIME NO.59/2021 OF PARLI EXCISE RANGE , Palakkad
PETITIONER/S:
UNNIKRISHNAN
AGED 55 YEARS
SON OF CHELLAN, MEENANGAD VEETTIL,
MUNDUR-I VILLAGE,
PALAKKAD, 678592
BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)
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. .3367 of 2021 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3367 of 2021
-------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of May, 2021
ORDER
This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal
Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) was heard through Video Conference.
2. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.59/2021 of Parli
Excise Range. The above case is registered against the petitioner
alleging offences punishable under Sections 55(i) and Section 13 of
the Abkari Act.
3. The prosecution case is that on 07.04.2021 at 11.40 the
accused was found in possession of 4.900 litres of Indian Made
Foreign Liquor (IMFL) at Mundur.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if the
prosecution case is accepted, no offence under Section 55(i) of the
Abkari Act is made out. The counsel submitted that even according
to the prosecution the petitioner was found only in excess quantity of
IMFL for which the offence under Section 63 of the Abkari Act is
applicable and hence the rigor under Section 41A of the Abkari Act is
not applicable. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to
abide any condition, if this Court grant him bail. The Public
Prosecutor opposed the bail application.
5. I think there is some force in the arguments of the counsel
for the petitioner. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was
found in possession of IMFL and the quantity is 4.900 litres. Whether
the offence under Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act is made out in such
circumstances is a matter to be investigated. I do not want to make
any observation on the merit of the case. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, I think that this bail application can be
allowed on stringent conditions.
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 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 appear before the
Investigating Officer within three weeks from today
and shall undergo interrogation;
2. After interrogation, if the Investigating
Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, he shall be
released on bail 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. 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;
4. The petitioner shall not leave India
without permission of the Court;
5. The petitioner shall not commit any
offence similar to the offence alleged in this case.
6. 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;
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
sd
