Kerala High Court
Bharathiraja vs State Of Kerala on 6 May, 2022
BAIL APPL. NO. 3133 OF 2022 1
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. 3133 OF 2022
CRIME NO.156/2022 OF Marayur Police Station, Idukki
PETITIONER/S:
1 BHARATHIRAJA
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O KANAKARAJ, HOUSE NO MGP XII/134, MICHAELGIRIKARA,
MICHAELGIRIBAHAGOM,
MARAYOOR KARA, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685620
2 PERIYAKARUPPAN @ MUTHUKUMAR
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. SANKILL,
HOUSE NO MGP XII/138, MICHAELGIRIKARA, MICHAELGIRIBAHAGOM,
MARAYOOR KARA, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685620
3 AJITH
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O KARUPPUSWAMY,
HOUSE NO MGP XII/10,CHERUVADU KARA, MICHAELGIRIKARA,
MICHAELGIRIBAHAGOM, MARAYOOR KARA, MARAYOOR VILLAGE, IDUKKI
DISTRICT., PIN - 685620
4 VINOD KUMAR
AGED 21 YEARS
S/O VIJAYAKUMAR, MGP X/123,
MELADIBHAGOM, MARAYOOR KARA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685620
BY ADVS.
N.K.SHYJU
DEEPAK RAJ
C.P.ROOPA
GIREESH PANKAJAKSHAN
ARCHANA MITHRAN O.K.
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.SANAL P.RAJ
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.05.2022, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 3133 OF 2022 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No. 3133 of 2022
-------------------------------
Dated this the 6th 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.156 of
2022 of Marayoor Police Station. They are accused Nos.2 to
5. The above case is registered against the petitioners
alleging offences punishable under Secs. 143, 147, 148,
294(b), 325, 308 r/w 149 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that on 16.3.2022 at 5
p.m, at old sugar mill in Cheruvadu Bhagom of Michaelgiri
Kara of Kanthalloor Village, the accused persons after
hatching a criminal conspiracy formed themselves into an
unlawful assembly and they restrained the autorikshaw in
which the defacto complainant came. It is alleged that
accused Nos. 2 to 5 pulled out the defacto complainant
from the autorikshaw. The prosecution further alleged that
the 1st accused uttered obscene words against the defacto
complainant and inflicted an injury using a knife. The
petitioners were arrested on 17.3.2022.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the Public
Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners are in custody from 17.3.2022. The counsel
submitted that the main overtact is against the 1 st accused.
There is no specific overtact against the petitioners. The
counsel submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide
any conditions, if this Court grants them bail. The Public
Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The
Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners committed
serious offence. It is true that the allegations against the
petitioners are very serious. But the main allegation is
against the 1st accused. The 1st accused used the weapon.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and
also considering the period of detention, I think the bail
application can be allowed.
6. 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.
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 petitioners 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 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. The petitioners shall not leave
India without permission of the
jurisdictional Court.
4. The petitioners shall not commit
an offence similar to the offence of which
they are accused, or suspected, of the
commission of which they are suspected.
5. The petitioners shall appear
before the investigating officer on all
Mondays and Fridays at 10 a.m., till final
report is filed.
6. 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
SKS
