High CourtsSingle Bench

Pushparaj vs State Of Kerala

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 9 May 2023 · Citation: (2023) 05 KL CK 0053

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 376, 406, 450, 506
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 3217 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 717 words

P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J

1.

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

2.

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.32 of 2023 of Vanitha Police Station, Malappuram. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 450, 406, 506 and 376 of IPC.

3.

The prosecution case is that, in August, 2019 and thereafter, on several occasions, the petitioner had trespassed into the shop and house of the de facto complainant and committed rape on her. It is also alleged that the petitioner had also obtained Rs.8,00,000/- from the de facto complainant and cheated without returning the said amount. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed offences.

4.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 onwards. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the de facto complainant filed Annexure A2 complaint before the Commandant of Malabar Special Police on 01.04.2023 in which there is no allegation of rape. Thereafter, the present complaint is filed before the police. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant him bail. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner committed serious offences.

6.

This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is very serious. But the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 onwards. This Court perused Annexure A2 complaint submitted by the de facto complainant before the Commandant on 01.04.2023. There is no allegation of rape in that complaint. Thereafter, the present complaint is filed before the police alleging rape. It is true that the non-mentioning of the allegation of rape in Annexure A2 complaint is a matter to be investigated by the police. I do not want to make any observation about the same. But its a fact that the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023 onwards. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody from 06.04.2023, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The petitioner can be directed to appear before the investigating officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 11.00 a.m., till the final report is filed. With that condition, this application can be allowed.

7.

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.

8.

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.

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.

2.

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.

3.

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

4.

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.

5.

The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays at 11.00 a.m., till the final report is filed.

6.

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.