Kerala High Court
Santhosh Kumar S vs State Of Kerala on 14 March, 2025
Author: P.V. Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:22247
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 3531 OF 2025
CRIME NO.259/2023 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2025 IN CRL.MC NO.39 OF
2025 OF SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.16:
RANDEEP
AGED 38 YEARS,
ASHOK BHAVAN, MEENADU VILLAGE, KARAMMUDU P.O
CHATHANOOR KOLLAM, PIN - 691 572.
BY ADVS.
SRI. M.S.ANEER
SMT. SREELAKSHMI SURESH
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PARAVUR POLICE STATION KOLLAM, PIN - 691 301.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.HRITHWIK C.S.(SR)PUBVLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl.NO.2683/2025, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:22247
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 2683 OF 2025
CRIME NO.259/2023 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 18.02.2025 IN BAIL APPL.
NO.6805 OF 2024 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.3,5,6,7,8,11,12,13 AND 14:
1 SANTHOSH KUMAR S
AGED 56 YEARS, S/O SUKUMARA PILLAI,
SUKUMARA SADANAM', KEEZHEMANGAD,
KALAKKODE CHERRY, POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT.(A3), PIN - 691 301.
2 G. BHADRAKUMAR
AGED 56 YEARS, S/O GANGADHARAN PILLAI,
SHAKTI VIHAR', KALAKKODE CHERRY, POOTHAKKULAM
VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.(A5), PIN - 691 301.
3 CHANDRACHOODAN PILLAI
AGED 71 YEARS, S/O BHASKARAN PILLAI,
THADUTHAVILA VEEDU', POOTHAKKULAM CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.(A6),
PIN - 691 301.
4 ASHOKAN PILLAI,
AGED 68 YEARS, S/O VASU PILLAI,
PANDARAVILA PUTHENVEEDU', KALAKKODE CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (A8),
PIN - 691 301.
5 N SADANANDAN PILLAI,
AGED 77 YEARS, S/O NARAYANA PILLAI,
KARIKKULATHUVILA VEEDU', POOTHAKKULAM CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (A11),
PIN - 691 301.
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:22247
6 JANARDHANAN PILLAI,
AGED 74 YEARS, S/O VASU PILLAI,
KONATHU VEEDU', , KALAKKODE CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.(A13),
PIN - 691 301.
7 SATHEESAN,
AGED 72 YEARS, S/O RAMAKRISHNAN,
PUTHENVEEDU, KALAKKODE CHERRY, POOTHAKKULAM
VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (A7), PIN - 691 301.
8 SUJI MOHAN
AGED 56 YEARS, W/O MOHANAN PILLAI,
THEKKEVILA (JANANI), KALAKKODE CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT (A10),
PIN - 691 301.
9 P.S SUGATHAN
AGED 69 YEARS, S/O SUBHANANDAN,
VRINDAVANAM, PERAL, KOONAYIL CHERRY,
PARAVOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT (A12),
PIN - 691 301.
0 SHAILAJA,
AGED 69 YEARS, W/O SATHEESHBABU,
ROHINI, VAYALIL, KALAKKODE CHERRY,
POOTHAKKULAM VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (A14),
PIN - 691 301.
BY ADV
SRI. V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031.
2 THE ASSISTANTE POLICE
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, C- BRANCH,
KOLLAM CITY, PIN - 691 301.
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
4
2025:KER:22247
3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE (SHO),
PARAVUR POLICE STATION, PIN - 691 301.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.03.2025, ALONG WITH BAIL APPL.NO.3531/2025, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
5
2025:KER:22247
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
-----------------------------------
B. A. No. 3531 OF 2025 & 2683 OF 2025
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of March, 2025
COMMON O R D E R
These Bail Applications are filed under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
2. Petitioners are accused in Crime No. 259/2023 of
Paravur Police Station. Therefore, I am disposing these bail
applications by a common order. The above Crime is
registered against the petitioners and others alleging offences
punishable under Section 403, 405, 409, 418 and 420 IPC
and Section 68(1), 32(c), 94(B), and 94(8)(A) of the Kerala
Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.
3. The prosecution case is that, the 1st accused who
was the Secretary of the Kalakkode Service Co-operative
Bank and who was having responsibility to perform the duties
of the Bank along with the accused No.2 to 15, conspired
together and created false documents in violation of the loan
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
criteria alotted loan illegally to accused Nos.16 to 25 and
thereby, caused huge loss to the bank. Hence, it is alleged
that accused committed the alleged offences.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioners and the Public
Prosecutor.
5. When B.A.No.2683 of 2025 came up for
consideration on 04.03.2025, this Court passed the following
order.
"The petitioners will surrender before the
Investigating Officer on 10.03.2025. The
Investigating Officer shall record the
statement of the petitioners and file a report
before this Court as to whether custodial
interrogation of the petitioners is necessary."
Accordingly, the petitioners in that case surrendered
before the Investigating Officer.
6. Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners
cooperated with the investigation.
7. This is a case which is registered in the year 2023.
There is no case for the prosecution that the petitioners were
absconding. Even now the petitioners are not arrested. That
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
itself shows that no custodial interrogation is necessary.
There can be a direction to the petitioners to once again
surrender before the Investigating Officer for interrogation
and after interrogation, if their arrest is recorded, there can
be a direction to the Investigating Officer to release the
petitioners on bail after imposing stringent conditions. This
court also considered the fact that the custodial interrogation
is not necessary because the prosection can prove the case
through oral and documentary evidence.
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. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v State of
Uttar Pradesh and Another [2021(5)KHC 353]
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
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 to appreciate
why there should be a compulsion on the
officer to arrest the accused."
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
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 decision
and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this
Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:
1. The petitioners 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 petitioners,
they 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.
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
3. The petitioners shall appear before the
Investigating Officer for interrogation as
and when required. The petitioners 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.
4. Petitioners shall not leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
5. Petitioners shall not commit an offence
similar to the offence of which they are
accused, or suspected, of the commission
of which they are suspected.
6. Needless to mention, it would be well
within the powers of the investigating
officer to investigate the matter and, if
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
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].
7. If any of the above conditions are
violated by the petitioners, the
jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in
accordance to law, even though the 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
JUDGE
S.M.K.
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 2683/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMON
ORDER DATED 09-08-2024 IN CRL MC NOS
1469/2024, 1478/2024 & 1479/2024
ANNEXURE A-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN BA NO
6805 /24 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD 18-
3-2025
B.A.Nos.3531 & 2683 OF 2025
2025:KER:22247
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3531/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 259 OF
2023 OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION
ANNEXURE II THE ACCUSED COPY OF THE CRL M.C 39/2025
PASSED BY THE COURT OF SESSIONS KOLLAM
ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE TRAVEL NOTIFICATION
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM HIS
OFFICE
ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE TICKET OF THE
PETITIONER
