Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; personal liberty must be prioritized, and stringent conditions can be imposed to ensure cooperation with the investigation.

O R D E R

This Bail Application is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.

2. The petitioners are accused in Crime No.1429/2024 of Karamana Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 316 (2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ), 2023.

3. The prosecution case is that the defacto complainant is conducting a financial firm as Anugraha Finance at Karamana. Petitioners came to the firm of the defacto complainant on 17.12.2024 and pledged gold and collected huge amount. It is further alleged that the gold ornaments pledged were found fake and the petitioners cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, they pledged gold and it is accepted after proper verification by the appraiser of the financial institution. It is a false case foisted against the petitioners. The counsel also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide any conditions imposed by this Court, if this Court grants them bail.

6. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegation against the petitioners are serious. But, the Public Prosecutor submitted that, as per the report received by him from the Investigating OfÏcer, no criminal antecedents is alleged against the petitioners.

7. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor. I am surprised to see that the financial institutions are accepting fake gold even without verifying the same. In financial institutions, an appraiser is necessary. I don’t know whether any appraiser of gold is available in the defacto complainant’s financial institution. There is no criminal antecedents also alleged against the petitioners. According to the petitioners, they pledged gold ornaments. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think, the petitioners 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. 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)) If arrest is made routine, it can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. If the Investigating OfÏcer has no reason to believe that the accused will abscond or disobey summons and has, in fact, throughout cooperated with the investigation we fail