The grant of bail is a rule and putting a person in jail is an exception. Even though the grant of bail is entirely the discretion of the court, it has to be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case and the discretion has to be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner.

The application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the sole accused in Crime No.115/2024 of Payangadi Police Station, Kannur, registered against him for allegedly committing the offences punishable under Sections 447, 341, 323, 326 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(in short, ‘IPC’). The petitioner was arrested on 25.02.2024.

2. The essence of the prosecution case is that:

on 11.02.2024, at around 20.30 hours, the accused, with an intention to commit an offence, trespassed into the house of the compound of the sister of the de-facto complainant, wrongfully restrained the husband of the de-facto complainant, and attempted to commit his murder by beating him on his head with a crowbar. The injured suffered serious injuries, including a head injury. Thus, the accused has committed the above offences.

3. Heard; Sri. P.S. Binu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Neema T.V., the learned Senior Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the accusations levelled against him. He has been falsely implicated in the crime. There is a case and a countercase registered in connection with the incident.

In any given case, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.02.2024, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and the recovery has been effected. Therefore, the petitioner’s further detention is unnecessary. Hence, the application may be allowed.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. She submitted that the petitioner had hit the injured on his head and he suffered serious injuries.

She made available the accident register-cum-wound certificate issued by the AKG Memorial Co-operative Hospital, Thalassery, dated 15.02.2024 to show that the injured had suffered a head injury and his condition was critical. She submitted that the investigation is still in progress. If the petitioner is let off on bail, there is every likelihood of him interfering with the investigation. Hence, the application may be dismissed.

6. On an evaluation of the materials on record, it is evident that the petitioner was arrested on 25.02.2024. There is a counter case registered against the de-facto complainant as Crime No.119/2024 of the very same Police Station for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC.

Indisputably, the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.02.2024, the investigation in the case is practically complete, and the recovery has been effected.

7. In Sanjay Chandra v. CBI [2012 1 SCC 40], the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held that the fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence until a person is found guilty. Any imprisonment prior to conviction is to be considered as punitive and it would be improper on the part of the Court to refuse bail solely on the ground of former conduct.

8. In Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. [(2018) 3 SCC 22] the Honourable Supreme Court observed that grant of bail is a rule and putting a person in jail is an exception. Even though the grant of bail is entirely the discretion of the court, it has to be evaluated based on the facts and circumstances of each case and the discretion has to be exercised in a judicious and compassionate manner.

9. Subsequently, in State of Kerala v. Raneef [(2011) 1 SCC 784], the Honourable Supreme Court has again held that undertrial prisoners detained in jail for indefinite periods, without any sufficient reason or due to the delay in concluding the trial, will tantamount to infringement of their right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

10. On an anxious consideration of the facts, the rival submissions made across the Bar, and the materials placed on record, especially taking into account the fact that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 25.02.2024, the investigat