Kochani vs State Of Kerala

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

Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.2292 of 2020 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam. The above case is registered against the petitioner

alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 353, 354, 294(b) r/w.149 IPC.

The prosecution case is that the de facto complainant, who is an Advocate Commissioner appointed in O.S No.278 of 2020 by the Munsiff Court,

Punalur inspected the plaint schedule property on 20.11.2020 at 3 pm and at that time, the accused in this case formed themselves into an unlawful

assembly with the intention of preventing the Advocate Commissioner and in execution of their common intention, the 1st accused abused the de facto

complainant with obscene words and even assaulted her. There are allegation against the other accused also.

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

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the incident is not happened as alleged by the prosecution. The counsel submitted that the petitioner

was arrested on 27.11.2020. The non bailable offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 353 and 354 IPC. The counsel submitted that

the maximum punishment that can be imposed in these offences are below seven years. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled the benefit of the orders of

the Full Bench of this Court in WP(C) No.9400 of 2020. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grant

him bail.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are very serious.

After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very

serious. The petitioner and the other accused attacked an Advocate Commissioner. An Advocate Commissioner appointed by a Court is an officer of

the Court. If there is any attack on an Advocate Commissioner that amounts to an attack on the Court. But in this case the petitioner is the 2nd

accused and he is in custody from 27.11.2020. The non bailable offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 353 and 354 IPC.

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and considering the detention period of the petitioner, I think this bail application can be

allowed 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:

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.

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.

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

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.

The petitioner 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 petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is

granted by this Court.