Kerala High Court
Jijo Issac Alex 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. 940 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
JIJO ISSAC ALEX
AGED 31 YEARS
JIJO BHAVAN GN-27 GANDHIJI NAGAR KOTTAMUGAL HOUSE
NALANCHIRA P O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695015
BY ADV JOHNSON ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PIN-682031
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.940 of 2022
-------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of May, 2022
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal
Procedure Code.
2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in crime No.928/2021 of
Puthenvelikkara Police Station. The above case is registered against
the petitioner and others alleging offence punishable under Section
498A read with 34 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner and others had
mentally and physically harassed the defacto complainant who is
the wife of the petitioner herein.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor. The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
allegation against the petitioner is not correct. The Counsel
submitted that the 2nd and 3rd accused have already released on bail
as per Annexure A2 order. The counsel also submitted that the
petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that this Court grant
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
him bail. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. But the
Public Prosecutor submitted that if this Court is granting bail,
stringent conditions may be imposed. After hearing both sides, I
think that this bail application can be allowed on stringent
conditions. The offence alleged are matrimonial offences. Therefore
the petitioner can be directed to appear before the Investigating
Officer for interrogation.
5. 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.
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.
.
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
"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 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/they
shall be released on bail on executing a bond for
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
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. Petitioner shall notNsd leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
5. 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.
6. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer on all Mondays at 10 am till
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
final report is filed.
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
JUDGE
Nsd
BAIL APPL. NO. 940 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 940/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure1 PHOTOGRAPH
Annexure2 ORDER DT. 17/1/22 IN CRLMC.60/22 OF THE
SESSIONS
