IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 15TH VAISAKHA, 1945 BAIL APPL. NO. 1657 OF 2023 CRIME NO.848/2022 OF Chavakkad Police Station, Thrissur AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCRMC 1691/2022 OF DISTRICT COURT &

SESSIONS COURT,THRISSUR PETITIONER/S:

1 AMAR AGED 20 YEARS KARUPPAMVEETTIL HOUSE, BABY ROAD, MANATHALA, POST CHAVAKKAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, , CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680506

2 ASWIN AGED 20 YEARS MARUTHANKUNNU HOUSE, BABY ROAD, MANATHALA. POST CHAVAKKAD,MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680506

3 APPU @ AKSHAYARAJ AGED 21 YEARS POOKOTTIL HOUSE, BABY ROAD, MANATHALA, POST CHAVAKKAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680506

4 GOKULKRISHNAN AGED 21 YEARS KANDENGHATT HOUSE, BABY ROAD, MANATHALA, POST CHAVAKKAD, MANATHALA VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680506 BY ADVS.

T.K.ASOKAN RASMI NAIR T.

K.R.DALLY T.A.GOKUL RESPONDENT/S:

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

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHAVAKKAD CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION, POST CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN - 680506 BY ADV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

05.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J ------------------------------------

B.A. No. 1657 of 2023 --------------------------------------

Dated this the 5^th day of May, 2023

O R D E R

This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.).

2. Petitioners are the accused in Crime No.848/2022 of Chavakkad Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Secs. 341, 323, 324 r/w 34 IPC. Subsequently, the offence under Sec. 308 IPC is also added.

3. The prosecution case is that on 15.10.2022 at

8.45 pm, the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention attacked the defacto complainant at Baby Road Centre and beat him with iron pipes and voluntary caused grievous hurt to him and attempted to commit culpable homicide.

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

5. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence. The counsel submitted that the injured in this case has not sustained any serious injuries and Sec. 308 IPC is added only to see that the petitioners are behind the bar. The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.

6. After hearing both sides, I think this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions. Originally, the offence under Sec. 308 IPC was not included. So Sec. 308 IPC is added subsequently. Whether the offence under Sec. 308 IPC is made out or not is a matter to be decided at the time of investigation and trial, if any. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners are not necessary in this case. They can be released on bail after imposing stringent conditions.

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. 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:

1. Petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation;

2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer proposes to arrest the petit