Shufad. R.M. vs State Of Kerala

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

The Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.3110/2020 of Kattakada Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District. The above case is registered

against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 450, 323, 363, 370, 109, 376(2)(n) read with 34 of the I.P.C. The offence

under Section 4 read with 3(a), 6 read with 5(l), 17 read with 16 of the POCSO Act is also alleged. Altogether there are four accused in this case.

The prosecution case is that on 28.09.2020, at about 7.30 p.m. the accused Nos. 1 to 3, committed house trespass and the 1st accused committed

rape on the victim girl.

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

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the 1st accused and the victim girl were in love. The learned counsel submitted that, the

admitted prosecution case is that, the 1st accused committed rape and there is no allegation of rape or commission of any offence under the POCSO

Act against the petitioner. The learned counsel also submitted that, the only allegation against the petitioner is that, he facilitated the 1st accused to

commit the offence. The learned counsel submitted that, the petitioner surrendered before the Investigating Officer on 12.10.2020 and he is in custody

from that date onwards. The learned counsel also submitted that, the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions, if this Court grant him bail.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. But the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, there is no allegation of rape against

the petitioner. The allegation of rape is against the 1st accused.

After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The petitioner is in custody from 12.10.2020 onwards. I

perused the case records in this case. The main allegation of rape is against the 1st accused. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of this

case 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:

The 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;

The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court;

The 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.