Kerala High Court
Amal 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.3291 OF 2021
CRIME NO.48/2021 OF CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION,MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
AMAL,AGED 21 YEARS
SON OF BABU, PADATH CHEKKODATH VALAPIL HOUSE,
KANJIRATHANI DESOM, KAPPUR VILLAGE-679552
BY ADV. SRI.BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA-682031
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:
Bail Appl..No.3291 OF 2021 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3291 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 2nd accused in Crime No.48/21 of
Changaramkulam Police Station. The above case is registered against
the petitioner and the other accused alleging offences punishable
under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 and 302 read with 149
IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that on 09.02.2021 at 6 pm,
the accused Nos.1 to 5 formed themselves into an unlawful assembly,
armed with deadly weapons at a pathway leading to Galaxy School,
Kolikkara, committed rioting and in prosecution of their common
intention and object, wrongfully restrained one Muneeb, son of
Moidunny and attacked him indiscriminately both with hands and
deadly weapons. The injured succumbed to the injuries. The
petitioner was arrested on 13.02.2021.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is in custody from 13.02.2021 and now almost 83 days over.
The counsel submitted that the petitioner is the 2 nd accused and even
as per the prosecution case no serious overtact is attributed against
him. The counsel also submitted that the investigation of the case is
almost over. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and
submitted that the petitioner committed serious offences.
5. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very
serious. But the petitioner is in custody from 13.02.2021. The
investigation is almost over. No serious overtact is there against the
petitioner compared to the overtacts of the other accused. The
petitioner is the 2nd accused. Considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering the detention period
of the petitioner, I think that the bail application can be allowed.
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. 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 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 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
sd
