Eswari vs State Of Kerala

P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J

This Bail Application is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code .

The petitioners are accused in Crime No.137/2023 of Edathua Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Section 393 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

The prosecution case is that, on 15.02.2023, at about 10.30 a.m., while the de facto complainant was travelling in a KSRTC bus, the first accused who was standing behind the de facto complainant in furtherance of their common intention of all the accused, snatched a gold chain worn by the de facto complainant and handed over the same to the 2nd accused, who in turn, had handed the same to the 3rd accused. The petitioners were arrested on 15.02.2023 and they were in custody from that date onwards.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no grievance to the de facto complainant and the matter is settled with the de facto complainant. It is submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged. It is also submitted that the petitioners are in custody from 15.02.2023. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the final report is filed and the case is now pending as C.C. No.201/2023 before the lower court. It is also submitted that the petitioners are the natives of Tamil Nadu and if they are released on bail, they will not be available for trial.

This Court considered the contention of the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Simply because the matter is settled between the petitioners and the de facto complainant, the petitioners cannot be released on bail, because the offence alleged is not compoundable. But, the counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are ready to offer local sureties, so that there may not be any question of abscondence. Since the petitioners are in custody from 15.2.2023 and the petitioners are ready to offer local sureties, I think the bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions.

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 local 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 offer local sureties while executing the bond.

The petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional court as and when required.

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.