Kerala High Court
Mukesh Mohan vs State Of Kerala on 30 January, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
1
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 904 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1013/2024 OF ALOOR POLICE STATION, Thrissur
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMP NO.101 OF 2025
OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, CHALAKUDY
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE
PALAPILLI POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -,
PIN - 680504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2
2025:KER:7459
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..874/2025, 875/2025
AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
3
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 874 OF 2025
CRIME NO.650/2024 OF PUTHENVELIKKARA POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.40 OF 2025 OF
DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE
PALAPILLI POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -,
PIN - 680 504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
4
2025:KER:7459
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..904/2025 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
5
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 875 OF 2025
CRIME NO.681/2024 OF Kalamassery Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.3879 OF 2024
OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE PALAPILLI
POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -, PIN - 680504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV.
SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..904/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
6
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 876 OF 2025
CRIME NO.710/2024 OF Kalamassery Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.3881 OF 2024
OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE PALAPILLI
POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -, PIN - 680504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV. SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..904/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
7
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 877 OF 2025
CRIME NO.711/2024 OF Kalamassery Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.3883 OF 2024
OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE PALAPILLI
POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -, PIN - 680504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV. SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..904/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
8
2025:KER:7459
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 10TH MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 878 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1041/2024 OF Kalamassery Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC NO.3884 OF 2024
OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
MUKESH MOHAN
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O MOHAN MUZHIKULATHU HOUSE PALAPILLI
POOVAKATTUKUNNU THRISSUR -, PIN - 680504
BY ADVS.
S.RAJEEV
V.VINAY
M.S.ANEER
SARATH K.P.
ANILKUMAR C.R.
K.S.KIRAN KRISHNAN
DIPA V.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
BY ADV. SRI. G. SUDHEER, PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.01.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..904/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
9
2025:KER:7459
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 and 878 of 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of January, 2025
ORDER
These Bail Applications are filed under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. These bail applications are
connected and therefore, I am disposing of these
cases by a common order. The petitioner in these
bail applications are one and the same.
2. The petitioner is an accused in Crime
Nos. 1041/2024, 681/2024, 710/2024 and
711/2024 of Kalamassery Police Station. He is
also involved in Crime No.650/2024 of
Puthenvelikkara Police Station and also in Crime
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
No.1013/2024 of Aloor Police Station, Thrissur.
These cases are registered inter alia under
Section 406 and 420 of IPC.
3. The prosecution case in almost all these
cases is that the petitioner who is the Managing
Director of 'Most Land Travel Venture Pvt. Ltd.'
promised the defacto complainant and other
victims in these cases that he will arrange visa
abroad and collected huge amount. It is alleged
that the petitioner did not arrange the visa and
not return the amount. Hence, these cases are
registered. The petitioner was arrested in
connection with the 4 cases registered by the
Kalamassery Police on 12.12.2024 and his arrest
was recorded in Crime No.650/2024 of
Puthenvelikkara Police Station on 17.12.2024. As
far as Crime No.1013/2024 of Aloor Police Station,
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
the petitioner's arrest was recorded on
25.12.2024.
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 trying to settle the matter
with all the victims and some of the cases were
already settled. The counsel also submitted that
the petitioner is ready to abide any condition
imposed by this Court, if this Court grants him
bail. The counsel submitted that, unless the
petitioner come out of the jail, he will not be able
to settle the cases.
6. The Public Prosecutor seriously opposed
the bail application. The Public Prosecutor
submitted that, altogether 25 cases are
registered against the petitioner. The Public
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
Prosecutor also submitted that, if the petitioner is
released on bail, there is chance for absconding
and therefore, the petitioner may not be released
on bail.
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 facts remains that the petitioner
is in custody from 12.12.2024. According to the
petitioner, he is trying to settle all these matters
and unless he is released on bail, he will not be
able to settle the matter. The Public Prosecutor
submitted that there are several victims.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, I think, the petitioner can be released on
bail after imposing stringent conditions. There
can be a direction to the petitioner to surrender
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
his passport before the jurisdictional court in
which the crimes are registered by the
Kalamassery Police. If, there is no passport, the
petitioner will file an affidavit to that effect. With
that condition bail can be granted to the
petitioner.
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
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
securing fair trial.
9. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union
of India [2024 KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme
Court 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, the same
rule holds good with only modification
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
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 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
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
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"."
Considering the dictum laid down in the
above decisions and considering the facts and
circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is
allowed with the following conditions:
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.
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
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. The petitioner shall surrender his
passport before the jurisdictional
court in which the crimes are
registered by the Kalamassery
Police. If, there is no passport, the
petitioner will file an affidavit to
BA Nos.904, 874, 875, 876, 877 & 878 of 2025
2025:KER:7459
that effect.
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. If any of the above conditions are
violated by the petitioner, the
jurisdictional Court can cancel the
bail in accordance with law, even
though the bail is granted by this
Court. The prosecution is at liberty
to approach the jurisdictional court
to cancel the bail, if there is any
violation of the above condition.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
nvj JUDGE
