Arjun @ Balu And Ors vs State Of Kerala

This Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

Petitioners are accused Nos.3,4,5 & 6 in Crime No.1024 of 2020 of Vallikunnam Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners

alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 294(b), 323, 324, 427, 354 r/w Section 149 of the IPC.

The admitted prosecution case is that, on 27.11.2020 at 8.30 P.M., the accused wrongfully restrained one Vishnu and damaged his bike bearing

Registration No.KL-31-G-5187. It is also alleged that accused Nos.2 to 6 by uttering obscene words against the defacto complainant, criminally

trespassed into his house. It is also alleged the accused attacked the defacto complainant, his wife and mother. It is alleged that they committed

mischief also. The petitioners were arrested on 28.11.2020.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. But the Public Prosecutor submitted that if this Court is granting bail, stringent

conditions may be imposed.

After hearing both sides, I think this Bail Application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is true that the Public Prosecutor submitted that there

is criminal antecedents against some of the accused. But the only non-bailable offence alleged against the petitioners in this case is under Section 452

& 354 IPC. The petitioners were in custody from 28.11.2020 onwards. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I think, the

petitioners can be released on bail on stringent conditions.

Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020) and a Full Bench of this

Court in W.P(C)No.9400 of 2020 issued various salutary directions for minimizing the number of inmates inside prisons.

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.

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:

Petitioners shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the

like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

Petitioners shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.

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.

The petitioners shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of

social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic.

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.