Kerala High Court
Adithya Gokul.M.S vs State Of Kerala on 16 October, 2020
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 24TH ASWINA, 1942
Bail Appl..No.6482 OF 2020
CRIME NO.72/2020 OF CBCID, ERNAKULAM , Ernakulam
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ADITHYA GOKUL.M.S
AGED 25 YEARS
GOKULAM HOUSE,
KANJIRANOOJI,
PERUVAYAL.P.O.,
KOZHIKODE
673008
BY ADV. SMT.BIMALA BABY
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA
682031
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.RENJITH.T.R., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.6482 OF 2020
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
B.A.No.6482 of 2020
-------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of October, 2020
ORDER
This Bail Application filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code was heard through Video Conference.
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 734/2020 of Medical College Police Station which is now investigated by the Crime Branch as Crime No.72/ CBCU/2/ EKM/2020. The above case is registered against the petitioner and another alleging offences punishable under Section 67(B) (a) (b) of Information Technology Act and Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. B.A.No.6482 OF 2020 3
3. The prosecution case is that, the petitioner purchased child pornographic videos from the first accused by giving money and kept it in his mobile phone for private viewing and for making money by selling the same to others.
4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is working as Assistant Professor in Psychology in HM College of Science and Technology. He passed M.Sc. in Applied Psychology. The petitioner is preparing for entrance examination for M.Phil in Clinical Psychology and Phd. from Kerala University, Thrivandrum. In connection with his study, he downloaded files including pictures related to sexual offences against ladies and children etc. from internet. While searching for links having criminal files, one Arun Joseph Sabu who is the first accused offered to send those photos to the petitioner to help his studies. The counsel submitted that all his activities are in connection with his studies. B.A.No.6482 OF 2020 4 The counsel submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide any conditions, if this Court grant him bail.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are very serious.
7. After hearing both sides, I think this Bail Application can be allowed on stringent conditions. The maximum punishment that can be imposed for the offences alleged against the petitioner are below seven years. Moreover, the petitioner has got a case that he purchased these videos in connection with his studies. Whether this is correct or not is a matter to be investigated by the investigating officer. I don't want to make any observation on the merit of the case. Whether the petitioner can purchase such pornographic videos and whether the same can be kept by him is all matters to be investigated by the investigating officer. But considering the entire facts and circumstances, I think, B.A.No.6482 OF 2020 5 this bail application can be allowed on stringent conditions.
8. Moreover, considering the need to follow social distancing norms inside prisons so as to avert the spread of the novel Corona Virus Pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Contagion of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons case (Suo Motu Writ Petition(C) No.1 of 2020) and a Full Bench of this Court in W.P(C)No.9400 of 2020 issued various salutary directions for minimizing the number of inmates inside prisons.
9. 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.
10. Considering the dictum laid down in the above B.A.No.6482 OF 2020 6 decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions:
1. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation.
2. After interrogation, if the Investigating Officer propose to arrest the petitioner, he shall be released on bail executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer concerned.
3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. The petitioner shall co-
operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
4. Petitioner shall not leave India B.A.No.6482 OF 2020 7 without permission of the Court.
5. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected.
6. The petitioner shall strictly abide by the various guidelines issued by the State Government and Central Government with respect to keeping of social distancing in the wake of Covid 19 pandemic.
8. If any of the above conditions are violated by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court can cancel the bail in accordance to law, even though the bail is granted by this Court.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE al/-