Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 26803
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
MARY JOSEPH, J
KANISHKA CHANDRAN, – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA, – Respondent
Crl.MC/6470/2021
SHABU SREEDHARAN, JINSON OUSEPH, CHITRA VIJAYAN, SHYAM KUMAR M.P
An accused working abroad and unaware of charges may be granted bail upon intent to surrender and cooperation with judicial proceedings.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Proceedings - Abkari Act - Sections 55(a), 67B - Court allowed bail application after considering factors of petitioner's absence and intent to surrender.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was accused in a case related to contraband seized from a house owned by his father. He contended he was unaware of the charges as he had been working abroad since 2018, and sought bail upon surrendering to avoid detention.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted the petitioner's prolonged absence due to working abroad and lack of awareness regarding the charges. It concluded that given his willingness to surrender and cooperate, allowing bail was justified.
Issues: Whether the petitioner should be granted bail considering his long-term absence from the jurisdiction and intent to surrender.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of an accused's right to surrender and the need to assess the circumstances leading to the lack of awareness regarding the legal proceedings.
Final Decision: The application for bail was granted, directing the lower court to consider the bail application after the petitioner's surrender.
Legal Category Hierarchy
ORDER
Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2021 The petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No.117/2015 of Kayamkulam Excise Range, Alappuzha Distirct. The offences alleged against him and the other accused are those punishable under Sections 55 (a) and 67B of the Abkari Act (for short ‘the Act’). It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the ownership of the house wherefrom the contraband was allegedly seized stands in the name of his father and therefore, he was arrayed as the 4th accused in the case. According to him the petitioner was neither the owner of the house nor has occupied it at any point of time.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was working abroad and therefore was unaware of his implication in the crime in question. He came to know about his implication only recently when the Excise officials visited the residence of his sister for execution of the NBW issued against him. After getting information, the petitioner was desirous of surrendering before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Kayamkulam (for short ‘the court below’) and to take bail in the case. His apprehension was that in the event of his surrender he would be arrested and detained in judicial custody and therefore the petition on hand is moved seeking for his release on bail in the event of his surrender.
3. It is learnt from the averments of the petitioner that the case is now pending in the Long Pending register as L.P.No.18/2021 and NBW issued against is pending execution. The petitioner has produced the copy of his passport and visa which would go to show that he was abroad since 2018. The crime was registered against him in 2015. There is absolutely no material to be convinced of the date on which the Final Report chargesheeting him was filed.
4. Having due regard to the factum that the petitioner was abroad since 2018, not in receipt of the summons issued against, acquainted only recently about his arraignment as accused in the crime and his desire to surrender and co-operate with the prosecution proceedings, this Court is inclined to issue the direction sought by the petitioner in the application filed.
5. In the result, the application is allowed and the court below is directed to consider the application seeking to recall the NBW and grant bail preferred by him after his surrender before it in his favour and to permit him to take part in the proceedings of the case.
Crl.M.C stands disposed of, issuing directions to the court below as above.
