Kerala High Court
Gopan .S vs State Of Kerala on 5 September, 2024
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2024:KER:67496
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
CRIME NO.217/2024 OF NENMARA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 18.07.2024 IN CRMC
NO.3797 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,
PALAKKAD
PETITIONERS:
1 GOPAN .S,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O SIVADASAN .V, ODIYATH HOUSE, ATTUPARA POST,
PALAKKAD ( NAME MISTAKENLY SHOWN AS GOPALAN IN
BAIL DISMISSAL ORDER OF SESSIONS COURT,
PALAKKAD), PIN - 678508
2 MANEESH .M ,
AGED 24 YEARS
S/O MANIKANDAN .K, M.K NIVAS, NEAR PUTHANKULAM,
PALAPARAMBU, NEMMARA, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678508
3 ARUNJITH .A,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O ARUNMUGAN, ODIYAM HOUSE, MATTUPARA, NEMMARA
POST, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678508
BY ADVS.
GEORGE RENOY
K.S.ROCKEY
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SEETHA S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2
2024:KER:67496
Dated this the 5th day of September, 2024
ORDER
The application is filed under Section 482 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short, BNSS), for an order of pre-arrest bail.
2.The petitioners are the accused 6 to 8 in
Crime No.217/2024 of the Nemmara Police Station,
Palakkad, which is registered against nine accused
persons for allegedly committing the offences
punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326, 308, and 506
(ii) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
Subsequently, the offences under Sections 143, 147,
148, 341, 324, 326, 308 and 506(ii) r/w Section 149 of
the IPC was added after deleting the earlier sections.
3. The gist of the prosecution case is that:
on 31.03.2024, at around 11:00 hours, the accused, in
prosecution of their common intention, had assaulted
the first informant and his companions with dangerous
weapons. The first accused wrongfully restrained the
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
first informant and the second accused hit him with a
reaper on his face and his two teeth got dislocated.
Thereafter, the third accused hit the first informant on
his nose with a crowbar and he suffered a fracture on
his nasal bone and the left jaw. Then, the accused 4
and 5 hit the first informant with wooden sticks.
Subsequently, when the friend of the first informant
named Arundev attempted to intervene in the matter,
the accused 6 to 9 assaulted him with wooden sticks.
Thus, the accused have committed the above offences.
4. Heard; Sri. George Renoy, the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Seetha.
S. the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that the petitioners are totally innocent of
the accusations levelled against them. A reading of the
First Information Report and the other materials placed
on record would clearly reveal that the specific overt
act of causing grievous injuries on the injured is
attributed against the accused 1 to 3. The only
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
allegation against the petitioners is that they assaulted
the first informant's friend with wooden sticks.
However, there is no corresponding injury on the friend
of the first informant so as to attract the offences under
Sections 326 and 308 of the IPC. The petitioners are
law abiding citizens without any criminal antecedents.
The petitioners' custodial interrogation is not
necessary, and no recovery is to be effected. Hence,
the application may be allowed.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the application. The Investigating Officer has filed a
bail objection report, inter alia, contending that the
petitioners had restrained the first informant's friend
named Arundev and assaulted him with wooden sticks.
She made available the treatment records of the
injured and submitted that all the injured have suffered
serious injuries. The petitioners' custodial interrogation
is necessary and recovery is to be effected for the full
fledged investigation of the crime. If the petitioners
are granted an order of pre-arrest bail, it may hamper
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
the investigation. Hence, the application may be
dismissed.
7. On a perusal of the bail objection report, as
well as the materials placed on record, it can be seen
that the specific overt act is attributed against the
accused 1 to 3, who assaulted the first informant with
a reaper and a crowbar and the first informant suffered
grievous injuries. The allegation against the petitioners
is that they assaulted the friend of the first informant
with wooden sticks. Prima facie there is no material to
show that the first informant's friend suffered any
grievous injuries.
8. In Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and
another [(2012) 4 SCC 379], the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has held that, an order of pre-arrest bail being an
extra ordinary privilege, should be granted only in
exceptional cases. The judicial discretion conferred
upon the Courts has to be properly exercised, after
proper application of mind, to decide whether it is a fit
case to grant an order of pre-arrest bail. The court has
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
to be prima facie satisfied that the applicant has been
falsely enroped in the crime and his liberty is being
misused.
9. On an overall consideration of the facts, the
rival submissions made across the Bar and the
materials placed on record, particularly on
comprehending the fact that the only allegation made
against the petitioners is that they attacked the first
informant's friend with wooden sticks and he suffered
injuries and the specific overt act of committing
grievous injuries is attributed against the accused 1 to
3, I am satisfied that the petitioners have made out
convincing grounds to invoke the discretionary
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the
BNSS. Hence, I am inclined to allow the application;
subject to the condition that the petitioners co-operate
with the Investigating Officer.
In the result, the application is allowed subject
to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners are directed to surrender
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
before the Investigating Officer within 10 days from
today.
(ii) In the event of arrest of the petitioners,
the Investigating Officer shall release the petitioners on
bail on them executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
fifty thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for
the like amount each;
(iii) The petitioners shall appear before the
Investigating Officer for interrogation, as and when
directed by the Investigating Officer.
(iv) The petitioners shall not directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat or procure to
any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court
or to any Police Officer or tamper with the evidence in
any manner, whatsoever;
(v) The petitioners shall surrender their
passports before the jurisdictional court concerned
within a period of one week from the date of their
release on bail. If they have no passport, they shall file
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
an affidavit to the effect before the said court within
the said period;
(vi)The petitioners shall not get involved in any
other offence while on bail;
(vii) In case of violation of any of the
conditions mentioned above, the jurisdictional court
shall be empowered to consider the application for
cancellation of bail, if any filed, and pass orders on the
same, in accordance with law.
(viii)Applications for deletion/modification of the
bail conditions shall also be filed before the court
below.
(ix) Needless to mention, it would be well within
the powers of the Investigating Officer to investigate
the matter and, if necessary, to effect recoveries on the
information, if any, given by the petitioners even while
the petitioners are on bail as laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of
Delhi) And another [2020 (1) KHC 663].
(x) The observations made in this order are
BAIL APPL. NO. 6372 OF 2024
2024:KER:67496
only for the purpose of considering the application and
the same shall not be construed as an expression on the
merits of the case to be decided by competent Courts.
SD/-
C.S.DIAS,JUDGE
rmm/5/9/2024
