Retheesh.R vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 4934 Ker

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4934 Ker
Judgement Date : 4 May, 2022

Kerala High Court

Retheesh.R vs State Of Kerala on 4 May, 2022

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
                     BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022
        CRIME NO.339/2022 OF SOORANADU POLICE STATION, KOLLAM


PETITIONERS/ACCUSED:

    1       RETHEESH.R
            AGED 33 YEARS
            S/O.RAVEENDRAN,
            RETHEESH BHAVANAM,
            PADIJATTA KIZHAKKU,
            SOORANAD NORTH P.O,
            KUNNATHOOR THALUK,
            KOLLAM DISTRICT,
            PIN - 690561
    2       BAIJU.R
            AGED 36 YEARS
            S/O RAVI, BAIJU BHAVANAM,
            PADIJATTA KIZHAKKU,
            SOORANAD NORTH P.O,
            KUNNATHOOR THALUK,
            KOLLAM DISTRICT
            PIN - 690561
    3       KAMAL.K
            AGED 34 YEARS
            S/O KOCHUCHERUKKAN,
            VAKKE VADAKKETHIL,
            PAVUMBA.P.O, THAZHAVA VILLAGE,
            KARUNAGAGAPPALLY THALUK,
            KOLLAM DISTRICT,
            PIN - 690574
            BY ADV P.V.DILEEP


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
 BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022

                              2

           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
           PIN - 682031
    2      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
           SOORANAD POLICE STATION,
           SOORANAD .P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT
           PIN - 690522
           BY ADV.SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN, SENIOR PUBLIC
           PROSECUTOR

        THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022

                                 3



                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                  --------------------------------
                      B.A.No.3340 of 2022
            -------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 4th day of May, 2022


                              ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of

Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Petitioners are apprehending arrest in Crime

No.339/2022 of Sooranad Police Station. The above case

is registered against the petitioners and others alleging

offences inter alia under Section 326 of the Indian Penal

Code.

3. The prosecution case is that on 26.03.2022 at

7.30 pm, 25 identifiable volunteers appointed in

connection with the temple festival of Poruvazhi

Peruviruthi Malanada Temple, unlawfully assembled

together and assaulted the defacto complainant with a

stump on the various parts of the body. Hence it is

alleged that the accused committed the offence.

4. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022

Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioners

submitted that the incident is not happened as alleged

by the petitioners. The counsel also submitted that the

alleged incident occurred in connection with the temple

festival. The petitioners and others were appointed by

the temple as volunteers. There was a clash between

two groups and the petitioners and other committee

members were trying to avoid the clash. The counsel

also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide

any conditions if this Court grant them bail. The Public

Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. After

hearing both sides, I think this Bail Application can be

allowed on stringent conditions. It is true that the

allegations against the petitioners are serious. But,

custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be

necessary for completing the investigation. The

petitioners can be directed to appear before the

Investigating Officer till final report is filed.

5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022

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.

6. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v State

of Uttar Pradesh and Another (2021(5)KHC 353)

considered the point in detail. The relevant paragraph of

the above judgment is extracted hereunder.

"12. We may note that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. (Joginder Kumar v. State of BAIL APPL. NO. 3340 OF 2022

UP and Others (1994 KHC 189: (1994) 4 SCC 260: 1994 (1) KLT 919: 1994 (2) KLJ 97: AIR 1994 SC 1349: 1994 CriLJ 1981)) If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self- esteem of a person. If the Investigating Officer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation we fail to appreciate why there should be a compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused."

7. 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: