IMPORTANT POINT
Bail is the rule and incarceration is the exception; the court emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the necessity of justifying arrests.

ORDER :

These Bail Applications filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ) are connected and therefore, I am disposing of these cases by a common order.

2. Petitioner in these cases are one and the same. She is an accused in different crimes at Valappad Police Station and Thrissur Town West Police Station. The above cases are registered alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also under the Provisions of the the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act , 2019 (for short, the BUDS Act).

3. The prosecution case is that the Pravasi Syndicate Chits Private Limited (Malayali Kshema Nidhi Limited) is operated by accused No.1 and 2. They assured the defacto complainants that, they would provide 12% interest on the deposited amount. Relying on this, the defacto complainants in these cases deposited huge amount. However, they did not obtain the principal amount or the promised interest. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the above said offences.

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

5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was in custody in connection with the same set of facts and she was released on bail by this Court as per the common order dated 05.03.2025 in BA No.2968/2025 and connected cases. After releasing the petitioner based on the above bail order, now the Police is again harassing the petitioner and attempting to arrest the petitioner. It is submitted that while the petitioner was in custody, formal arrest was recorded, but production warrant was not issued. The petitioner earlier filed bail applications before this Court under Section 483 of BNSS in these cases and this Court observed that since the petitioner is already released from the jail, only an application under Section 482 of BNSS is maintainable. Annexure-2 is the order. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide any conditions if this court grant her on bail. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail applications.

6. Admittedly the petitioner was in custody for several days in connection with difference crimes with same set of facts. I am of the considered opinion that indefinite incarceration of the petitioner is not necessary. The petitioner can be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within three weeks, and thereafter, she can be directed to appear continuously for three days in Valappad Police Station and two days in Thrissur Town West Police Station. After interrogation, if the arrest of the petitioner is recorded, there can be a direction to release the petitioner on bail.

7. 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.

8. Recently the Apex Court in Siddharth v State of Uttar Pradesh and Another [2021(5)KHC 353] considered the point in detail. The relevant paragraph of the above judgment is extracted hereunder:

“12. We may note that personal liberty is an important aspect of our constitutional mandate. The occasion to arrest an accused during investigation arises when custodial investigation becomes necessary or it is a heinous crime or where there is a possibility of influencing the witnesses or accused may abscond. Merely because an arrest can be made because it is lawful does not mandate that arrest must be made. A distinction must be made between the existence of the power to arrest and the justification for exercise of it. (Joginder Kumar v. State of UP and Others (1994 KHC 189: (1994) 4 SCC 260: 1994 (1) KLT 919: 1994 (2) KLJ 97: AIR 1994 SC 1349: 1994 CriLJ 1981))