IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
Vishnuprakash P. S/o Prakash R. Kunnil Veedu - Appellant
Versus
The Station House Officer - Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 3154 OF 2025
Decided On : 11-03-2025
(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 483 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 351(3), 3(5) - Bail Application - Petitioner accused of serious offences including intent to kill - Court emphasizes that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, allowing bail after considering period of detention and settlement of matter, imposing stringent conditions. (Paras 1 - 10 )
(B) Judicial Principles - The principle that 'bail is the rule and jail is the exception' is reinforced by Supreme Court precedents, which stress that bail should not be denied as a punishment or without proper consideration of the case facts. (Paras 8 - 10 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner is accused in a serious crime involving intent to kill during a dispute, arrested on 04.02.2025, with claims of settlement and prior bail granted to a co-accused.
Findings of Court:
Bail granted with stringent conditions due to the petitioner's period of custody and the nature of allegations.
Issues: The court addressed the serious nature of the accusations and the implications of prior criminal antecedents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the allegations are serious, the principle of bail being the rule necessitates granting bail under stringent conditions, especially after a considerable period of custody.
Result: Bail Application allowed under specified conditions.
ORDER :
This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.
2. The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.145/2025 of Kovalam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) , 109 , 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 04.02.2025 at about 01.00 AM, the 1 st accused/petitioner herein and his friends, with an intention to kill the defacto complainant and his friend Akhil due to a verbal dispute where the complainant and his friends played the song on the mic set at Vazhamuthu Junction in connection with the Kavadi Procession at the Panathura Subramanya Temple, while Akhil was talking to the complainant on the road near Chunakari Utram Nivas, the 1 st accused hit him. While the complainant prevented from beating his friend, the 1 st accused tried to kill the complainant by cutting his head and neck below the shoulder with a dangerous weapon. It is alleged that the other accused also actively involved in the crime. The petitioner was arrested on 04.02.2025.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 04.02.2025. The counsel submitted that the matter is settled and the victim has no grievance against the petitioner. Annexure-A3 is the afÏdavit. It is also submitted that accused No.4 is already released on bail under Section 482 of BNSS .
6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that there is criminal antecedents to the petitioner.
7. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that the allegation against the petitioner is serious and he has got criminal antecedents also.
Simply because the matter is settled, this Court cannot grant bail to the petitioner because the offences alleged are under Sections 118(1) and 109 of BNS . But the petitioner is in custody from 04.02.2025. Considering the period of detention, I think, the petitioner can be released on bail after imposing stringent conditions.
8. 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.
9. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India [2024 KHC 6431] , the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that:
“21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must mention here that the Special Court and the High Court did not consider the material in the charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the appellant's case could not be properly appreciated. When a case is made out for a grant of bail, the Courts should not have any hesitation in granting bail. The allegations of the prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in a case like the present case where there are stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with only modification that the bail can be granted if the conditions in the statute are satisfied. The rule also means that once a case is made out for the grant of bail, the Court cannot decline to grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our Constitution.” (underline supplied)
10. In Manish Sis
Bail is established as the rule and jail as the exception, necessitating the court to grant bail under stringent conditions even for serious allegations.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail unless compelling reasons exist to deny it.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when conditions are met, ensuring fair trial rights.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail unless compelling reasons exist to deny it.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when warranted, ensuring fair trial rights.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; serious allegations do not preclude bail if conditions are satisfied.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when justified, regardless of serious allegations.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when conditions are satisfied, ensuring fair trial rights under Article 21.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail when warranted, regardless of the seriousness of allegations.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; courts must grant bail unless compelling reasons exist to deny it.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.