Allowed

Renuka v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Sept 2020Bail Appl./6055/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kerala HC allowed bail to Renuka and Soorya, accused of cruelty and criminal conspiracy under IPC. The court cited the 'bail-is-the-rule' principle and Supreme Court directions on prison overcrowding during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bail granted with stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail with a bond for Rs.50,000/- and two sureties for like sums, subject to stringent conditions including social distancing guidelines.

Renuka Vs State of Kerala — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 6TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.6055 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.1540/2020 OF Anchal Police Station , Kollam

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 RENUKA AGED 48 YEARS WIFE OF SURENDRA PANICKER, SREE SOORYA, KARACKALMUKKU, PARAKKODE, ADOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

¶9

2 SOORYA AGED 22 YEARS DAUGHTER OF SURENDRA PANICKER, SREE SOORYA, KARACKALMUKKU, PARAKKODE, ADOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN-691523

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD

¶11

RESPONDENT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031

¶13

R1 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI.SAJJU.S, GP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

B.A.No.6055 of 2020 2

¶16

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J

¶17

B.A.No.6055 of 2020

¶18

Dated this the 28^th day of September, 2020

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Criminal

¶21

Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

¶22

Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.1540 of 2020 of

¶23

Anchal Police Station. The above case is registered against the

¶24

petitioners alleging offence punishable under Section498(A), 406, 201 r/w. 34 IPC.

¶25

3.The prosecution case is that the sister of the de facto complainant was effected with snake poison on 7.5.2020 and she succumbed to it. The prosecution case is that the 1^st accused is responsible. The allegation against these petitioners is that the petitioners mentally and physically harassed the deceased. It is also alleged that the petitioners

¶26

B.A.No.6055 of 2020 3

¶27

misappropriated gold ornaments. The petitioners are the mother and sister of the 1^st accused.

¶28

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

¶29

The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the allegation against the petitioners are not correct. The petitioners are in custody from 22.8.2020 onwards. The

¶30

counsel submitted that the 2^nd accused is already released on bail.

¶31

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. But the Public Prosecutor submitted that if this Court is granting bail, stringent conditions may be imposed.

¶32

After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The allegation against the petitioners is only the offences under Sections 498A, 406, 201 read with 34 IPC. The petitioners are in custody from 22.8.2020. The 2^nd accused is already released on bail.

¶33

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the

¶34

B.A.No.6055 of 2020 4

¶35

case, I think the petitioners also can be released on bail on stringent conditions.

¶36

Moreover, considering the need to follow social

¶37

distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

Considering the dictum laid down in the above

¶41

B.A.No.6055 of 2020 5

¶42

decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:

¶43

Petitioners shall be released on bail on

¶44

executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each

¶45

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

¶46

jurisdictional Court.

¶47

The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioners 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.

¶48

Petitioners shall not leave India without

¶49

B.A.No.6055 of 2020 6

¶50

permission of the jurisdictional Court.

¶51

Petitioners shall not commit an offence

¶52

similar to the offence of which they are

¶53

accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶54

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.

¶55

If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law,

¶56

even though the bail is granted by this Court.

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶59

cms

Renuka v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renuka v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Kerala Vs Shaji

Kuttiyan Valappil Aboobacker Vs Kuttiyan Valappil Hamsa

T.K.Dayanandan Vs Sudheer

M.E.Shajith, Vs State of Kerala

Sarfas Navas Vs the State of Kerla

Pratheesh Vs State of Kerala