Kerala High Court
V. Anilkumar vs State Of Kerala on 14 July, 2023
CRL.A No.1039/2023 1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
Friday, the 14th day of July 2023 / 23rd Ashadha, 1945
CRL.A NO. 1039 OF 2023
CRMC 581/2023 OF THE COURT OF THE SESSIONS COURT/SPECIAL COURT FOR SC/ST (POA)
ACT OREST OFFENCES), THODUPUZHA,
APPELLANTS/ACCUSED NO.1&2:
1. V. ANILKUMAR, AGED 51 YEARS,(SECTION FOREST OFFICER, IDUKKI WILDLIFE
SANCTUARY), S/O VELUKKUTTYPANIKKAR, SHIVAM, POOVATHOOR P.O,
NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN - 695161.
2. V C LENIN, AGED 39 YEARS,(BEAT FOREST OFFICER, IDUKKI WILDLIFE
SANCTUARY), S/O VIJAYAKUMARAN NAYAR, L V BHAVAN,KALLARA P.O,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695608.
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031.
2. SARUN SAJI, S/O SAJIMON, PUTHENPURAKKAL, MULLA, MATHAYIPPARA,
IDUKKI, PIN - 685505.
This Criminal appeal coming on for orders upon perusing the appeal
and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, PREEJA.
P.VIJAYAN, SMITHA (EZHUPUNNA), CHITRA JOHNSON, Advocates for the
petitioner and of the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for R1, the court passed the
following:
P.T.O.
CRL.A No.1039/2023 2/5
V.G. ARUN, J.
---------------------------------------------------
Crl.A. No.1039 of 2023
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of July, 2023
ORDER
The appellants are the accused in Crime No.703 of
2022 of Upputhara Police Station. Their application for
pre-arrest bail was rejected by this Court as per Annexure
A3 order. Thereafter, the 1st appellant was arrested on
02.07.2023 and the 2nd appellant on 01.07.2023. The
appellants are continuing in custody since then. Their
application for regular bail stands rejected by the order of
the Special Court dated 07.07.2023. Hence, this appeal.
2. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted
that his clients have been in custody for more than 12
days. Their interrogation being over and the investigation
almost complete, no purpose is served by the appellants'
continued incarceration.
3. Learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent/de facto
complainant stoutly opposed the prayer for bail, pointing
out that the appellants are influential persons and there is
CRL.A No.1039/2023 3/5
Crl.A. No.1039 of 2023
every possibility of the appellants interfering with the
investigation, if they are granted bail at this point of time.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor also opposed the
prayer for bail. It is submitted that the investigation is not
complete and continued custody of the appellants is
essential.
5. On consideration of the relevant facts and
circumstances and in view of the settled principle that,
bail is the rule and jail, the exception, I am of the opinion
that equity can be balanced by granting interim bail to
the appellants and providing the 2nd respondent with an
opportunity to file objection. In reaching such conclusion,
the fact that the ensuing 3 days are holidays is also taken
into account.
6. In the result, the following order is passed:-
i) The appellants shall be enlarged on bail on
executing bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty
thousand only) each, with two solvent
sureties for the like amount, to the
satisfaction of the trial court.
ii) The appellants shall not enter the limits of
CRL.A No.1039/2023 4/5
Crl.A. No.1039 of 2023
Upputhara Police Station, except for the
purpose of investigation, as directed by the
investigating officer.
iii) The appellants shall not, in any manner
whatsoever, try to influence or intimidate the
2nd respondent or other witnesses.
Post on 19.07.2023.
Sd/-
V.G. ARUN
JUDGE
bpr
14-07-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
CRL.A No.1039/2023 5/5
APPENDIX OF CRL.A 1039/2023
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRL APPEAL NO: 817/2023
DATED 27.06.2023
14-07-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
