Allowed

Akheela Palanchalil v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC26 Nov 2020Bail Appl./7728/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a bail application filed by Akheela Palanchalil, accused No.22, in a criminal case involving unlawful assembly and violence. The court granted bail citing the rule that bail is the exception, prior bail release of co-accused, and social distancing needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner released on bail to be executed by a bond of Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties upon proposal of arrest by Investigating Officer, subject to specific conditions.

Akheela Palanchalil Vs State of Kerala — Anticipatory Bail | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶6

CRIME NO.662/2020 OF Nadapuram Police Station , Kozhikode

¶7

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶8

AKHEELA PALANCHALIL AGED 35 YEARS MUDAVANTHERI P.O., THUNERI, KOZHIKODE 673505

¶9

BY ADVS. SMT.POOJA PANKAJ SRI.P.M.RAFIQ SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN SRI.AJEESH K.SASI SRI.V.C.SARATH SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN SRUTHY N. BHAT SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY SMT.KIRAN ANTONY

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA , ERNAKULAM PIN-682031 R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PP

¶12

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶14

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Dated this the 26th day of November 2020

¶17

This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.

¶18

2. The petitioner is the accused No.22 in Crime No.662/2020 of Nadapuram Police Station, Kozhikode District. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,452,294(b),506,323,324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

¶19

3. The prosecution case is that, on 27.09.2020 at about 1.30 p.m, accused persons with 10 other identifiable persons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and applicants 1 to 4 caused damages to the house by using an iron rod and attacked the defacto complainant and his wife with dangerous weapon due to

¶20

¶21

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶22

the animosity because the close relative of the defacto complainant had eloped with the daughter of one Palanchalil Ahammed.

¶23

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶24

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, some of the accused in the same crime were already released on bail by this Court as per order dated 05.11.2020 in B.A No.7093/2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, there is no serious allegation against the petitioner, who is the 22^nd accused in this case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner is ready to abide any condition if this Court release her on bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that, the petitioner is a lady.

¶25

6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, if this Court granting bail based on Annexure-2 stringent conditions may be imposed.

¶26

¶27

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶28

7. Admittedly, some of the accused were released on bail by this Court as per order dated 05.11.2020 in B.A. No.7093/2020. There is also a connected case which is registered as Crime No.664/2020 of Nadapuram Police Station. In that case also this Court granted bail to the accused in B.A No.7902/2020. In such circumstances there is no justification in denying bail to the petitioner. Therefore, this Bail application is also allowed.

¶29

8. 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.

¶30

9. 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

¶31

¶32

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶33

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.

¶34

10. 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:

¶35

1. The petitioner shall appear

¶36

before the Investigating Officer within

¶37

ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

¶38

2. After interrogation, if the

¶39

Investigating Officer proposes to arrest

¶40

the petitioner, she shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the

¶41

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶42

¶43

officer concerned;

¶44

3. The 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;

¶45

4. The petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the Court;

¶46

5. The petitioner shall not commit

¶47

an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of

¶48

the commission of which she is suspected;

¶49

6. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued

¶50

by the State Government and Central

¶51

Bail Appl..No.7728 OF 2020

¶52

¶53

Government with respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic;

¶54

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.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶57

JUDGE

¶58

Jms //True Copy// P.A to Judge

Akheela Palanchalil v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akheela Palanchalil 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

K.K.Surendran, Vs State of Kerala

Kunju Pillai, Vs State of Kerala,Rep.by Excise Inspector

Secretary Vs T.K.Unni Peravan

Zeenath P.M. Vs State of Kerala

Prasannan T.K. Vs State of Kerala

Vishnu Vs State of Kerala