Kapil Dev M.V. vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 05, 2023

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1346180

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1346180
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Decided On: May 05, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appl./2235/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kapil Dev M.V.

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the petitioner alleging offences punishable under sections 341, 353 & 506 of indian penal code (i.p.c.).3. the prosecution case is that, on 08.03.2023, the petitioner went to the village office, pudukai village and wrongfully restrained the de-facto complainant, who b.a.no.2235 of 2023 3 is the village officer of pudukai village and threatened him and thereby committed the above offence.4. heard the learned counsel for the petitionerand the learned public prosecutor. the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no offence under section 353 i.p.c. is made out in this case. the learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the only non-bailable offence in this case is under section 353 i.p.c. the learned public prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application.5. after hearing both sides, i think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. whether the offence under section 353 i.p.c. is made out or not is a matter to be decided during theinvestigation and trial, if any. but, considering the factsand circumstances of this case, no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. the bail b.a.no.2235 of 2023 4application can be allowed with stringent conditions. the petitioner can be directed to appear before the investigating officer on all mondays till final report is filed.6. moreover, it is a well accepted principle that, the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. thehon'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.7. considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this bail application is allowed with.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 15TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 2235 OF 2023 CRIME NO.311/2023 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED: KAPIL DEV M.V. AGED 40 YEARS, SON OF M.V.KRISHNAN, RESIDING AT KAMAL NIVAS, CHEDI ROAD, PUDUKAI VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671314. BY ADVS. T.MADHU C.R.SARADAMANI SHAHID AZEEZ RESHMA SANTHOSH RENJISH S. MENON
RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031. 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671315. BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN-GP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A.No.2235 of 2023 2 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------- B.A.No.2235 of 2023 ------------------------------- Dated this the 05th day of May, 2023

ORDER

This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)

2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.311 of

2023 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasargod District. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 341, 353 & 506 of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.).

3. The prosecution case is that, on 08.03.2023, the petitioner went to the Village Office, Pudukai village and wrongfully restrained the de-facto complainant, who B.A.No.2235 of 2023 3 is the Village Officer of Pudukai village and threatened him and thereby committed the above offence.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no offence under Section 353 I.P.C. is made out in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the only non-bailable offence in this case is under Section 353 I.P.C. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application.

5. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. Whether the offence under Section 353 I.P.C. is made out or not is a matter to be decided during the

investigation and trial, if any. But, considering the facts

and     circumstances    of   this   case,   no   custodial
interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.     The bail
B.A.No.2235 of 2023             4

application can be allowed with stringent conditions. The petitioner can be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays till final report is filed.

6. 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.

7. 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: B.A.No.2235 of 2023 5

1. Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned;

3. 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;

B.A.No.2235 of 2023 6

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

5. 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;

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

7. 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. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE Skk/04052023

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Kapil Dev M.V. vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan