Kerala High Court

Muhammed Riyas A.K vs State Of Kerala on 7 February, 2025

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

B.A.No.609 of 2025
                                        1


                                                                2025:KER:10189


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                     PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
       FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 18TH MAGHA, 1946
                            BAIL APPL. NO. 609 OF 2025
           CRIME NO.809/2024 OF ADIMALY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI
PETITIONER(S)/2ND ACCUSED:

                MUHAMMED RIYAS A.K.
                AGED 36 YEARS
                S/O ABDUL NAZER, ATHAYIKUNNEMMEL HOUSE, UNNIKULAM
                KARA, NEAR JUMAMASJID, UNNIKKULAM VILLAGE,
                KOZHIKKODE, PIN - 673574

                BY ADVS.
                S.JIJI
                M.M.BABY
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE & INVESTIGATING OFFICER:

       1        STATE OF KERALA
                REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
                KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

       2        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
                ADIMALI POLICE STATION, KALLARKUTTY ROAD, ADIMALI
                P.O., MNNAMKANDOM VILLAGE, IDUKKI,                PIN
                - 685561

                BY ADV.
                SRI.NOUSHAD K.A., SENIOR PP



        THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A.No.609 of 2025
                                          2


                                                                   2025:KER:10189


                            P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                          --------------------------------
                                B.A.No.609 of 2025
                           -------------------------------
                     Dated this the 07th day of February, 2025


                                       ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 482 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

2. Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.809/2024

of Adimali Police Station, Idukki. The above case is registered

against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections

7(1) and 14(c) of the Foreigners Act, 1946.

3. The prosecution case is that the 1 st accused is

working as the Manager and the petitioner who is the licensee of the

Abrigo Hotels Pvt. Ltd. located at Anaviratty in Vellathooval village,

without obtaining the C-form registration from FRRO authorities, in

contraventions of the relevant provisions of the Foreigner's Act,

permitted to reside four foreign residents at the above resort on

various occasions. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed

the above said offences.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

2025:KER:10189

petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. When this bail application came up for

consideration before this Court on 28.01.2025, this Court passed the

following order:

"The petitioner will surrender before the Investigating Officer on 03.02.2025. The Investigating Officer shall interrogate the petitioner and file a report before this Court after interrogation as to whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

The petitioner shall not be arrested till the next posting date.

Post on 07.02.2025.

Issue a copy of this order to the Public Prosecutor who will communicate the same to the Investigating Officer concerned."

6. As directed by this Court, the petitioner appeared

before the Investigating Officer. The Public Prosecutor submitted

that the petitioner is already interrogated and further custodial

interrogation is not necessary. If that be the case, the petitioner

can be released on bail. To complete the process, the petitioner can

be directed to surrender once again before the Investigating Officer.

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

2025:KER:10189

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. 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 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

2025:KER:10189

to appreciate why there should be a compulsion on the officer to arrest the accused."

9. 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.

10. 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 petitioner shall appear

before the Investigating Officer within two weeks

from today and shall undergo interrogation.

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

2025:KER:10189

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