On 19th August, Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan of Kerala High court granted bail for P. S. Shanavas with certain conditions.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner is an accused of Kalady police station, Ernakulam District. The petitioner along with 10 other persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and trespassed into the fish farm of the defacto complainant, intimidated and pushed her away by touching her breast and another accused inserted his hands in her churidar. Hence it was alleged that the petitioner and other accused committed the said offence. The defacto complainant was doing narcotic business in the fish farm. Hence, the local residents gathered there and questioned the same. There was a push and pull. A case and a counter case were registered.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner argued that the defacto complainant under the guise of conducting a fish farm was doing illegal activities and submitted the cases registered against the defacto complainant under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). They also argued that the defacto complainant is doing narcotic business in the fish farm. The petitioner also argued that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions, if this Court grants him bail.
Respondent’s Arguments
The respondent argued that if the Court is granting bail to the petitioner, stringent conditions may be imposed for granting the bail.
Court’s Observations
The Court observed into the case Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870), observed that, it is a well-accepted principle that, the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception and the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same in as much 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.
Court’s Order
After hearing both sides, the bail application was allowed, on stringent conditions. A case and counter case are registered and there were allegations and counter allegations about the same incident and which version is correct is a matter to be investigated by the investigating officer. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the bail application was allowed with some directions:
- The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer within ten days from the date and shall undergo interrogation.
- After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50, 000/- 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 cooperate 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 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 with law, even though the bail is granted by this Court
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
