Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 3935 OF 2023 CRIME NO.262/2023 OF THRITHALA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 3:
1 SADGUNAN AGED 48 YEARS S/O.PARAMESWARAN, 'GURU NILAYAM', PATTITHARA P.O., PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 2 BAIJU T.P. AGED 38 YEARS S/O.VELAYUDHAN, THOZHUTHUNGAL PARAMBIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA P.O., PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534 3 DHANEESH AGED 25 YEARS S/O.RAJAN, OORATH HOUSE, PATTITHARA P.O., PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534 BY ADV K.RAKESH
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER THRITHALA POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679534 ADV SEETHA S-SR PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :2 :
ORDER
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2023 This is an application for anticipatory bail.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos 1 to 3 in crime
No.262/2023 of Thrithala Police Station which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that on 26.04.2023, the
accused, in furtherance of their common intention, on account of their objection to the act of the defacto complainant and her husband in inviting a person named Rafeeque to their house, attacked the husband of the defacto complainant and Refeeque. When the defacto complainant intervened, the accused allegedly pulled the defacto complainant by tearing off her dress, thereby outraged her modesty and committed the offences. The crime was registered in such circumstances. As the petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with the investigation of this case, this application for anticipatory bail is submitted by the petitioners. :3 :
4. Heard Sri. K. Rakesh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Smt. Seetha S., the learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent of all the allegations. It is pointed out that, even if the allegations are assumed to be true, there are no materials indicating the commission of offences under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, which is the only non-bailable offence. The petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and shall abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, contends the learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor
would oppose the aforesaid application by highlighting that there are allegations against the petitioners, and the same has to be investigated. Therefore dismissal of the bail application is sought.
7. I have gone through the records. It is true that there
are allegations of assault committed by the petitioners. However, no serious injuries were sustained by any of the witnesses, and the offences alleged against the petitioners in connection with the assaults are bailable. The only non-bailable offence is under :4 : Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, and going through the materials placed on record, it is doubtful as to whether the said act was committed by the petitioners with the intention to outrage the modesty. However, it is a matter to be investigated, and therefore this court is not indenting to go deeper into that question. But, since, what is being considered here is the question whether anticipatory bail is to be granted to the petitioner or not, the benefit of the doubt should go in favour of the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I also do not find any necessity for custodial interrogation of the petitioner. Therefore, this bail application can be disposed ensuring the cooperation of the petitioners with the investigation. In such circumstances, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions:
(1) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting themselves to interrogation.
(2) After interrogation, the petitioners shall be released on
bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioners executing a bond for `1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. :5 :
(3) The petitioners shall fully cooperate with the investigation, including subjecting themselves to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.
(4) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m. every Saturday until the filing of the final report.
(5) The petitioners shall also appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required.
(6) The petitioners shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail.
(7) The petitioners shall not make any attempt to contact
any of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation.
(8) The petitioners shall not leave the State of Kerala
without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE ncd :6 : APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 3935/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A A TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.262/2023 OF THE THRITHALA POLICE STATION DATED, 1-5-2023