Kerala High Court

Delvin vs State Of Kerala on 28 January, 2025

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

                                            2025:KER:6660
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

 TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 8TH MAGHA, 1946

               BAIL APPL. NO. 1084 OF 2025

CRIME NO.52/2025 OF CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED:

          DELVIN
          AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.DAVIS, THEETHAYI HOUSE,
          VAILATHARA DESOM, KUTTICHITA VILLAGE,
          CHALAKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680
          724.

          BY ADVS.
          N.L.BITTO
          MITHUL T ANTO




RESPONDENT/STATE:

          STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.

          BY ADV
          G.SUDHEER, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   28.01.2025,   ALONG   WITH   Bail   Appl..1228/2025,   THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                         2025:KER:6660
B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025
                                   :2:


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

 TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 8TH MAGHA, 1946

                  BAIL APPL. NO. 1228 OF 2025

 CRIME NO.52/2025 OF CHALAKKUDY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
           CHARLES
           AGED 31 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, MORALI HOUSE,
           KORMALA DESOM, KUTTICHIRA VILLAGE, THRISSUR
           DISTRICT,
           PIN - 680 724.

           BY ADVS.
           RAPHAEL THEKKAN
           CHRISTINE MATHEW
           T.SAJI RAPHEL
           ABESH ALOSIOUS
           LIJO JOHN


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

           STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
           HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.

           BY ADV
           NOUSHAD K.A, SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

      THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   28.01.2025,     ALONG      WITH     Bail   Appl..1084/2025,   THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                 2025:KER:6660
B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025
                                :3:


                 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                 --------------------------------
             B.A.Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025
                  -------------------------------
         Dated this the 28th day of January, 2025


                   COMMON             ORDER

These Bail Applications filed under Section 483 of

the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita are connected,

and therefore I am disposing these cases by a common

order.

2. Petitioners are the 1st and 2nd accused in

Crime No.52 of 2025 of Chalakkudy Police Station,

Thrissur. The above case is registered against the

petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections

329(4), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 110, 351(2), 296(b) and

3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short 'BNS'),

2023.

3. The prosecution case is that on

13.01.2025 at 5 p.m., the accused, two in numbers 2025:KER:6660 B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025

criminally trespassed into the reception of Sidhartha Bar

Hotel and uttered obscene words against the 1 st

informant and the petitioners attacked a person named

Wilson, who is the Security of the above said hotel. It is

submitted that the accused committed other offences

also.

4. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the

Public Prosecutor.

5. Counsel appearing for the petitioners

submitted that the petitioners are arrested on

13.01.2025. The counsel submitted that the petitioners

are ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grants

them bail.

6. Public Prosecutor opposed the bail

application.

7. This Court considered the contentions of

the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. The

non-bailable offences alleged against the petitioners are 2025:KER:6660 B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025

under Sections 118(1) and 110 of BNS. It is true that

Public Prosecutor submitted that there is yet another

case registered against the petitioners. But, the

petitioners are in custody from 13.01.2025. Considering

the facts and circumstances of the case, I think the

petitioners can be released on bail after imposing

stringent conditions.

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 that the accused has the

opportunity of securing fair trial.

9. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union

of India [2024 KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme Court 2025:KER:6660 B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025

observed that:

"21. Before we part with the Judgment,

we must mention here that the Special

Court and the High Court did not

consider the material in the charge

sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus

was more on the activities of PFI, and

therefore, the appellant's case could

not be properly appreciated. When a

case is made out for a grant of bail, the

Courts should not have any hesitation

in granting bail. The allegations of the

prosecution may be very serious. But,

the duty of the Courts is to consider

the case for grant of bail in accordance

with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is

an exception" is a settled law. Even in

a case like the present case where

there are stringent conditions for the

grant of bail in the relevant statutes, 2025:KER:6660 B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025

the same rule holds good with only

modification that the bail can be

granted if the conditions in the statute

are satisfied. The rule also means that

once a case is made out for the grant

of bail, the Court cannot decline to

grant bail. If the Courts start denying

bail in deserving cases, it will be a

violation of the rights guaranteed

under Art.21 of our Constitution."

(underline supplied)

10. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of

Enforcement [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble

Supreme Court observed that:

"53. The Court further observed that,

over a period of time, the trial courts

and the High Courts have forgotten a

very well - settled principle of law that

bail is not to be withheld as a 2025:KER:6660 B.A Nos.1084 and 1228 of 2025

punishment. From our experience, we

can say that it appears that the trial

courts and the High Courts attempt to

play safe in matters of grant of bail. The

principle that bail is a rule and refusal is

an exception is, at times, followed in

breach. On account of non - grant of bail

even in straight forward open and shut

cases, this Court is flooded with huge

number of bail petitions thereby adding

to the huge pendency. It is high time

that the trial courts and the High Courts

should recognize the principle that "bail

is rule and jail is exception".