Kerala High Court
Pradeep Mathew vs State Of Kerala on 19 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 30TH CHAITHRA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 3334 OF 2024
CRIME NO.255/2024 OF VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
PRADEEP MATHEW
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O BENNY MATHEW, CHERIYATHURA FISHERMEN COLONY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695026
BY ADV. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI.PRASANTH M.P., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.3334 of 2024
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------
B.A.No.3334 of 2024
-------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of April, 2024
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of
the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)
2. The petitioner is an accused in Crime
No.255/2024 of Valiyathura Police Station. The above
case is registered against the petitioner alleging
offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323,
506(i), 354, 354A (1)(i), 354 (B) of IPC and Section 8
r/w 7 of the POCSO Act.
3. The prosecution case in brief is as follows:
The victim is a minor girl aged 16 years and she
was studying in 10th standard at St. Antony's School,
Valiyathura. The petitioner is an auto driver. On
04.03.2024 at about 4.30 p.m., while the victim was
chatting with her neighbour Hassan, the petitioner
came there assaulted her. It is further alleged that at
about 5.00 p.m., while she was going to the shop, the
petitioner scolded her in filthy language and caught
hold off her and fisted on her face. Hence it is alleged
that the accused committed the above said offences.
The petitioner was arrested on 11.03.2024.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is
not correct and he is ready to abide any conditions, if
this Court grant him bail. The learned Public
Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application and
submitted that serious offences are alleged against the
petitioner.
6. After hearing both sides and also considering
the fact that the petitioner is in custody from
11.03.2024 onwards, I think this Bail application can
be allowed after imposing stringent conditions. The
continued detention of the petitioner is not necessary
in the facts and circumstances of the case.
7. 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.
8. 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. 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 from
disclosing such facts to 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. Petitioner shall appear before the
investigating officer on all Mondays at 10 A.M.
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.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3334/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 CARBON COPY OF THE ORDER OF
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT FOR TRIAL
OF CASES RELATING TO ATROCITIES &
SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
CHILDREN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FOR
REGULAR BAIL, WHICH WAS DISMISSED BY
THE LEARNED SESSIONS JUDGE AS PER
ORDER DATED 05.04.2024
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
