Kerala High Court
Ananthu 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. 3267 OF 2022
CRIME NO.339/2022 OF Sooranadu Police Station, Kollam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ANANTHU
AGED 23 YEARS
S/O. VENU.G, KAILASAM, ERAVICHIRA NADUVIL,
SOORANAD SOUTH VILLAGE, PATHARAM. P.O,
KUNNATHOOR THALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 690522
BY ADV P.V.DILEEP
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
SOORANAD POLICE STATION,
SOORANAD .P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT
PIN - 690522
BY SENIOR ADV.SMT.SREEJA V.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3267/2022
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3267 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 04th day of May, 2022
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of
Criminal Procedure Code.
2. Petitioner is apprehending arrest in Crime
No.339/2022 of Sooranad Police Station. The above case is
registered against the petitioner 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.
B.A.No.3267/2022
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the
Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the incident is not happened as alleged by the
petitioner. The counsel also submitted that the alleged
incident occurred in connection with the temple festival.
The petitioner and others were appointed by the temple as
volunteers. There was a clash between two groups and the
petitioner and other committee members were trying to
avoid the clash. The counsel also submitted that the
petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this Court
grant him 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 allegation against the petitioner is serious.
But, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be
necessary for completing the investigation. The petitioner
can be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer
till final report is filed.
5. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that the
B.A.No.3267/2022
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.
B.A.No.3267/2022
(Joginder Kumar v. State of 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:
1. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer within two weeks
from today and shall undergo
interrogation.
2. After interrogation, if the Investigating
Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he
shall be released on bail on executing a
B.A.No.3267/2022
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 arresting 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 jurisdictional Court.
5. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on all Mondays and
Fridays at 10 am, till final report is filed.
B.A.No.3267/2022
6. The 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.
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. The prosecution and the victim are
at liberty to approach the jurisdictional
Court to cancel the bail, if any of the above
conditions are violated.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
B.A.No.3267/2022
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3267/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R IN CRIME NO.
339/2022 OF SOORANAD POLICE STATION IN
KOLLAM DISTRICT
