Sudheesh vs State Of Kerala

This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.390 of 2020 of Wandoor Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences

punishable under Sections 341 & 323 of the IPC. Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is also alleged against

the petitioner.

The prosecution case is that the petitioner wrongfully restrained and voluntarily caused hurt to the defacto complainant's child and thereby

committed the offence.

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

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the offence under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act is not made out even if the entire allegations

are accepted. The counsel submitted that the other offences alleged against the petitioner are bailable offences. The counsel submitted that there is

some dispute between the mother of the victim and the petitioner. This is a false case foisted against the petitioner. 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 made available the F.I statement given by the mother of the victim.

After hearing both sides, I think, this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. I perused the F.I statement given by the mother of the

victim. A reading of the F.I statement, it is clear that the main grievance of the defacto complainant is that the petitioner is not looking after the affairs

of the child. She says that she has no money. Therefore, she is in a difficult position to look after her child. But if the petitioner is arrested in this case,

it will not improve the position of the defacto complainant. The maximum punishment that can be imposed for the offence under Section 75 of the

Juvenile Justice Act is three years. In such circumstances, the petitioner is entitled the benefit of the Full Bench decision of this Court in W.P. (C)

No.9400/2020. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the only non-bailable offence alleged

against the petitioner is under Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 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 appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation.

After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of

Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned.

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 Court.

Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she 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.