Kerala High Court
Rajan vs State Of Kerala on 27 March, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
1
2025:KER:26755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 4331 OF 2025
CRIME NO.996/2024 OF Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl. NO.6630
OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
RAJAN
AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SREEDHARAN, EDATHOTTIL HOUSE,
KARATTUPALLIKKARA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 683 542
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN
HARIMOHAN
ASWATHY S MENON
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL
JYOTHIKUMAR R.
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL, KERALA,
PIN - 683 542
BY ADV.:
SRI.HRITHWIK.C.S, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4332/2025, 4333/2025 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2
2025:KER:26755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 4332 OF 2025
CRIME NO.997/2024 OF Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.6636 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
RAJAN
AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SREEDHARAN, EDATHOTTIL HOUSE,
KARATTUPALLIKKARA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683 542
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN
HARIMOHAN
ASWATHY S MENON
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL
JYOTHIKUMAR R.
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL,
KERALA, PIN - 683 542
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S, SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4331/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
3
2025:KER:26755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 4333 OF 2025
CRIME NO.998/2024 OF Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.6617 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
RAJAN
AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SREEDHARAN, EDATHOTTIL HOUSE,
KARATTUPALLIKKARA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683 542
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN
ASWATHY S MENON
HARIMOHAN
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL
JYOTHIKUMAR R.
RESPONDENT(S)/STATE:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL,
KERALA, PIN - 683542
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4331/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
4
2025:KER:26755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 4334 OF 2025
CRIME NO.933/2024 OF Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.6660 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
RAJAN
AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SREEDHARAN, EDATHOTTIL HOUSE,
KARATTUPALLIKKARA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683 542
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN
HARIMOHAN
ASWATHY S MENON
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL
JYOTHIKUMAR R.
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL,
KERALA, PIN - 683542
BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWICK C.S., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4331/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
5
2025:KER:26755
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 4336 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1010/2024 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN Bail Appl.
NO.6629 OF 2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:
RAJAN
AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SREEDHARAN, EDATHOTTIL HOUSE,
KARATTUPALLIKKARA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 683542
BY ADVS.
ARUN CHANDRAN
AMRITA ARUN
HARIMOHAN
ASWATHY S MENON
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL
JYOTHIKUMAR R.
RESPONDENT(S):
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM RURAL,
KERALA, PIN - 683542
BY ADV. SRI. NOUSHAD K.A., SR.PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.03.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4331/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
6
2025:KER:26755
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 and 4336 of 2025
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2025
ORDER
These bail applications are filed under Section
482 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.
2. The petitioner in all these cases are one
and the same person. He is an accused in Crime
Nos.933/2024, 996/2024, 997/2024, 998/2024 and
1010/2024 of Perumbavoor Police Station, Ernakulam.
The above cases are registered against the petitioner
alleging offences punishable inter alia under Sections
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
468, 471, 420 r/w 34 of IPC.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused in
these cases misused their official position and with
an intention to cause unlawful loss to the
complainants and to make wrongful gain to
themselves, forged documents and availed loans in
the name of the complainants and thereby cheated
them. 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 was already arrested in
connection with Crime No.838/2024 of Perumbavoor
Police Station, in which also the allegation is almost
same. The counsel submitted that the police custody
is also over. The counsel also submitted that the
petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
this Court, if this Court grant him bail.
6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail
application. Public Prosecutor submitted that the
petitioner is actively involved in these cases. He also
submitted that the petitioner was the Director of the
society from 1999-2019 and also the President of the
society from 2012-2017.
7. This Court considered the contentions of
the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true
that the present petition is filed under Section 482 of
BNSS. But the petitioner earlier filed a petition under
Section 482 of BNSS in Crime No.838/2024 of
Perumbavoor Police Station and this Court was not
inclined to grant bail. Subsequently, the petitioner
was arrested in that Crime on 04.03.2025. Now, this
Court granted bail to the petitioner in that crime in
BA No.4149/2025. Admittedly, the petitioner's arrest
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
is not recorded in these crimes. Considering the
facts and circumstances of the case and also
considering the fact that the petitioner's custodial
interrogation is already over, I think, the petitioner
can be released on bail under Section 482 of BNSS in
these cases also.
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
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
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 to
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
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.
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
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
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.
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
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
is accused, or suspected, of the
commission of which he is suspected.
6. The observations and findings in this
order is only for the purpose of deciding
this bail application. The principle laid
down by this Court in Anzar Azeez v.
State of Kerala [2025 SCC OnLine KER
1260] is applicable in this case also.
7. 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].
8. If any of the above conditions are
BA Nos.4331, 4332, 4333, 4334 AND 4336 of 2025
2025:KER:26755
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 victims 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
