Renjith vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 5053 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
        FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 16TH VAISAKHA, 1944
                       BAIL APPL. NO. 3334 OF 2022
         CRIME NO.221/2022 OF MARAYAMUTTAM POLICE STATION,
                           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CMP 1430/2022 OF JUDICIAL FIRST
                   CLASS MAGISTRATE -III,NEYYATTINKARA
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

            RENJITH
            AGED 27 YEARS
            S/O DHARMARAJAN, KUZHIVILAMELE PUTHEN VEEDU, VADAKARA,
            MARAYAMUTTOM, PERUNKADAVILA,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 124.
            BY ADVS.
            M.JAYAKRISHNAN
            SHAJI MATHEW N.M.


RESPONDENT/STATE/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM , PIN - 682031
    2       STATION HOUSE OFFICER
            MARYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION, MARAYAMUTTOM P.O.,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695124
            BY ADV.SMT.SREEJA V, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

     THIS   BAIL    APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
06.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A.No.3334 of 2022

                                 2



                    P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                --------------------------------
                     B.A.No.3334 of 2022
                 -------------------------------
             Dated this the 6th day of May, 2022


                             ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of

Criminal Procedure Code.

2. Petitioner is the sloe accused in Crime No.221

of 2022 of Marayamuttom Police Station,

Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered

against the petitioner alleging offences punishable

under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 506(i) & (ii),

427 and 308 IPC. Petitioner was arrested on

05.04.2022 and from that date onwards he is in

custody.

3.The prosecution case is that due to prior

enmity the accused with an intention to cause

grievous hurt to the de facto complainant, wrongfully

restrained the de facto complainant on 03.04.2022 B.A.No.3334 of 2022

at 7.15 pm at Thottavaram and tried to grab the

purse from the pocket of the de facto complainant.

At that time his spectacles fell down. It is alleged

that the accused trampled the spectacles and torn off

his wife's official papers and threatened him with

dare consequences. Thereafter on the same day at

7.30 pm, the accused again came and threatened

him. Thereafter the accused kicked him down and

torn off his shirt and kicked on his chest. It is also

alleged that the accused tried to hit his head with a

granite stone. It is alleged that the de facto

complainant sustained a loss of Rs.24,000/- also.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the

Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner

submitted that the petitioner is in custody from

05.04.2022 onwards. The counsel submitted that

the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this

Court grant him bail. The learned Public Prosecutor

seriously opposed the bail application. The Public B.A.No.3334 of 2022

Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner committed

serious offences. It is true that the allegation

against the petitioner is very serious. But the

petitioner is in custody from 05.04.2022 onwards.

The investigation of the case is almost over.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the

case, I think the petitioner can be released on bail on

stringent conditions.

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. Considering the dictum laid down in the B.A.No.3334 of 2022

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/her from disclosing such facts to B.A.No.3334 of 2022

the Court or to any police officer.

3. Petitioner shall not leave India

without permission of the

jurisdictional Court.

4. 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.

5. The petitioner shall appear

before the Investigating Officer on

all Mondays and Fridays at 10 am till

final report is filed.

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. The prosecution and the B.A.No.3334 of 2022

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 DM B.A.No.3334 of 2022

APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3334/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES AnnexureA1 CITIZEN COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.221/2022 OF MARAYAMUTTOM POLICE STATION DATED 04.04.2022 AnnexureA2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2022 IN CRL.M.P. NO.1430/2022 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT III, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANTHAPURAM,

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE