Kerala High Court
Abhijith Kumar C.A vs State Of Kerala on 5 February, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
1
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1021 OF 2025
CRIME NO.550/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9644 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686572
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail
Appl..1020/2025, 1022/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1020 OF 2025
CRIME NO.823/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9641 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.3:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686572
BY ADV. SRI. NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail
Appl..1021/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
3
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1022 OF 2025
CRIME NO.769/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9646 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.2:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED NO.2:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686572
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail
Appl..1021/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
4
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1023 OF 2025
CRIME NO.706/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9648 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.3:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686572
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail
Appl..1021/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
5
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1024 OF 2025
CRIME NO.728/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9649 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.3:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686572
BY ADV. SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail
Appl..1021/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
6
2025:KER:9324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 16TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1025 OF 2025
CRIME NO.716/2024 OF Kidangoor Police Station, Kottayam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.9650 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.2:
ABHIJITH KUMAR C.A.
AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.ANIL KUMAR S.
CHEMBALAMANIYANKUNNEL, BRAHMAMANGALAM P.O.,
CHEMPU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 605
BY ADV BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682 031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
KIDANGOOR POLICE STATION KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686 572
BY ADV. SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1021/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
7
2025:KER:9324
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024
and 1025 of 2025
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 05th day of February, 2025
ORDER
These Bail Application are filed under Section
482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),
2023. These bail applications are connected and
therefore, I am disposing of these bail applications by
a common order.
2. The petitioner in these cases are one and
the same person. He is the accused in Crime
Nos.823/2024, 550/2024, 769/2024, 706/2024,
728/2024 and 716/2024 of Kidangoor Police Station,
Kottayam. The above cases are registered against
the petitioner alleging offences inter alia under
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
Sections 406, 420 r/w 34 of IPC.
3. The prosecution case in all these crimes is
that, the 1st accused who is the owner of Falcon HR
Migration, a manpower recruiting agency had
cheated the defacto complainants in these cases by
offering a visa abroad. It is also alleged that the 1 st
accused collected huge amount from the defacto
complainants and the visa is not provided and the
amount is also not returned. Hence, it is alleged that
the accused committed the offence.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner is only an employee of the
Company and the 1st accused collected the amount
and cheated the victims. The counsel submitted that
another employee was also released on bail by this
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
Court as per order dated 08.01.2025 in BA
No.10767/2024. The counsel also submitted that the
petitioner is ready to abide any conditions imposed
by this Court, if this Court grant him bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously
opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor
submitted that the license is issued in the name of
the petitioner at Sharja.
7. This Court considered the contentions of
the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true
that the allegations against the petitioner is very
serious. But, the main allegation is against the 1 st
accused. The petitioner is ready to appear before
the Investigating Officer for interrogation.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
I think, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may
not be necessary. The petitioner can be directed to
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
surrender before the Investigating Officer and after
interrogation, if arrest is recorded, there can be a
direction to release the petitioner on bail. The
petitioner shall surrender his passport at the time of
surrender. If the petitioner is employed at abroad,
the petitioner can file appropriate application before
the jurisdictional court for release the passport and if
such an application is filed, the jurisdictional court
will consider the same, in accordance with law.
8. 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
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair
trial.
9. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v
State of Uttar Pradesh and Another [2021(5)KHC
353] considered the point in detail. The relevant
paragraph of the above judgment is extracted
hereunder.
"12. We may note that personal liberty is an
important aspect of our constitutional mandate.
The occasion to arrest an accused during
investigation arises when custodial investigation
becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or
where there is a possibility of influencing the
witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely
because an arrest can be made because it is
lawful does not mandate that arrest must be
made. A distinction must be made between the
existence of the power to arrest and the
justification for exercise of it. (Joginder Kumar v.
State of UP and Others (1994 KHC 189: (1994) 4
SCC 260: 1994 (1) KLT 919: 1994 (2) KLJ 97: AIR
1994 SC 1349: 1994 CriLJ 1981)) If arrest is
made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the
Investigating Officer has no reason to believe
that the accused will abscond or disobey
summons and has, in fact, throughout
cooperated with the investigation we fail to
appreciate why there should be a compulsion on
the officer to arrest the accused."
10. In Manish Sisodia v. Central Bureau of
Investigation [2023 KHC 6961], the Apex Court
observed that, even if the allegation is one of grave
economic offence, it is not a rule that bail should be
denied in every case.
Considering the dictum laid down in the above
decisions and considering the facts and
circumstances of these cases, these Bail Applications
are allowed with the following conditions:
1. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer within two weeks
from today and shall undergo
interrogation.
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
2. After interrogation, if the Investigating
Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he
shall be released on bail on executing a
bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty
Thousand only) with two solvent sureties
each for the like sum to the satisfaction of
the arresting officer concerned.
3. 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.
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
4. Petitioner shall not leave India
without permission of the jurisdictional
Court.
5. 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.
6. 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 petitioner even while the
petitioner is 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].
7. The petitioner shall surrender his
BA Nos.1020, 1021, 1022, 1023, 1024 & 1025 of 2025
2025:KER:9324
passport before the Investigating Officer
at the time of surrender.
8. If any of the above conditions are
violated by the petitioner, the
jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in
accordance to law, even though this bail
is granted by this Court. The prosecution
and the victim are at liberty to approach
the jurisdictional Court to cancel the bail,
if any of the above conditions are
violated.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
nvj JUDGE
