Shinas C vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5009 Ker

                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. 3269 OF 2022
CRIME NO.94/2021 OF Kallambalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram


PETITIONERS:

    1       SHINAS C
            AGED 22 YEARS
            SON OF JALEEL, CHERAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
            THOTTAKKARA, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 686672
    2       FARHATHULLAH
            AGED 21 YEARS
            SON OF ABDUL SALAM, PALLITHERI VEEDU,
            OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679101
    3       EBRAHIM BADHUSHA
            AGED 24 YEARS
            SON OF ASHARAF P.S, PULINCHOTTIL HOUSE,PULICKAPARAMBIL,
            OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT., PIN - 679101
            BY ADV NIREESH MATHEW
RESPONDENT:

            STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
            HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031
            SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.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. 3269 OF 2022

                                2


                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------
                     B.A.No.3269 of 2022
                    -------------------------------
              Dated this the 4th day of May, 2022


                              ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of

Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.94 of 2021

of Kallambalam Police Station. The above case is registered

against the petitioners and others alleging offences

punishable under the Indian Penal Code and also under

various Sections of POCSO Act. Petitioners were arrested on

25.03.2022.

3. The prosecution case is that the accused procured

nude photographs and videos of the survivor through social

media chat by constantly following her through the same. It

is also alleged that the accused also made the child to do

self penetrative sexual acts and thereby the accused

committed the offence.

BAIL APPL. NO. 3269 OF 2022

4. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the Public

Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the petitioners are in custody from 25.03.2022. The learned

counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no

criminal antecedents to the petitioners. The counsel for the

petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready to

abide any conditions if this Court grant them bail. The

counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners

are youngsters and they may not be detained in jail

indefinitely. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously

opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor

submitted that the allegation against the petitioners are

grave in nature. It is also alleged that all the accused have

close acquaintance together for committing the offences. It

is true that the allegation against the petitioners are very

serious. But the petitioners are in custody from 25.03.2022.

It is a case registered in 2021 and the investigation of the

case is in the final stage. In such circumstances, the

continued detention of the petitioners may not be BAIL APPL. NO. 3269 OF 2022

necessary for completing the investigation. The bail can be

granted to the petitioners on condition that if the

petitioners commit similar offence, the prosecution or the

victim can approach the jurisdictional Court to cancel the

bail order.

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 in as much

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. 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. Petitioners shall be released on bail BAIL APPL. NO. 3269 OF 2022

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 petitioners shall appear before

the Investigating Officer for interrogation

as and when required. The petitioners 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/her from

disclosing such facts to the Court or to any

police officer.

3. Petitioners shall not leave India

without permission of the jurisdictional

Court.

4. Petitioners shall not commit an

offence similar to the offence of which they BAIL APPL. NO. 3269 OF 2022

are accused, or suspected, of the

commission of which they are suspected.

5. If any of the above conditions are

violated by the petitioners, 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

there is any violation of the above

conditions.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE

np BAIL APPL. NO. 3269 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3269/2022

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

Annexure1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR THE TRIAL OF CASES RELATING TO ATROCITIES AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN CRL.MP.NO.664/2022 DATED 01.04.2022 RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL