eCourtsIndia

Praveenkumar vs. State Of Kerala

Final Order
Court:High Court of Kerala
Judge:Hon'ble Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Case Status:Unknown Status
Order Date:10 Jul 2020
CNR:KLHC010195632020

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Disposed

Before:

Hon'ble Honourable Mr. Justice P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Listed On:

10 Jul 2020

Order Text

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

FRIDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 19TH ASHADHA, 1942

Bail Appl..No.1974 OF 2020

CRIME NO.399/2020 OF Kottarakkara Police Station , Kollam

PETITIONERS:

  • 1 PRAVEENKUMAR AGED 28 YEARS PRAVEEN NIVAS, AMBALAKKARA, UMMANNOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM.
  • 2 DILEEP KUMAR AGED 52 YEARS PRAVEEN NIVAS, AMBALAKKARA, UMMANNOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM.
  • 3 MANIAMMA AGED 50 YEARS PRAVEEN NIVAS, AMBALAKKARA, UMMANNOOR, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM.

BY ADV. SRI.SYAM J SAM

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.

SR.PP. D. CHANDRASENAN

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

B.A.No.1974 of 2020 ------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of July, 2020


O R D E R

This Bail Application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code.

  1. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.399 of 2020 of Kottarakkara Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offence punishable under Section 498A read with 34 IPC.

  2. The prosecution case is that the 1st petitioner married the de facto complainant. Thereafter, the petitioners mentally and physically harassed the de facto complainant.

  3. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor.

  4. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is a matrimonial dispute and there is every chances to settle the

issue subsequently. He submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions if this Court granted bail to them.

  1. The Public Prosecutor submitted that it is a matrimonial offence and no assault is alleged against the petitioners and de facto complainant has not sustained any injury. Admittedly, it is a matrimonial dispute. Moreover, there is a case pending before the Family Court for return of money and gold filed by the petitioners. Since there is no serious allegation in the complaint, I think bail application can be allowed.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  1. 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:
  1. The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today.
  1. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioners, they 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.

  2. The petitioners shall co-operate with

the investigation and shall not threaten or attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

  1. The petitioners 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.

  2. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, 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

cms

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order