Kerala High Court
Rajan vs State Of Kerala on 15 November, 2019
Author: Alexander Thomas
Bench: Alexander Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1941
Bail Appl..No.8209 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER IN CMP 3410/2019 DATED 02-11-2019 OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, ADOOR
CRIME NO.1785/2019 OF Pandalam Police Station , Pathanamthitta
PETITIONER/ACCUSED-(A1):
RAJAN
AGED 54 YEARS
S/O.KRISHNAN, CHIRAVARAMBIL PUTHEN VEEDU,
KUNNATHUKARA MURI, PERINGANANDU VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A.No.8209/2019 2
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
-------------------------------------------
B.A.No.8209 of 2019
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of November, 2019
ORDER
The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.1 among the two accused in the instant Crime No.1785/2019 of Pandalam Police Station, which has been registered for offences punishable under Section 118(i) of Kerala Police Act 2011, Sections 6 and 24 of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 34 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case in short is that with the intention to sell Hans, it is stated to be a tobacco product and to gain unlawful enrichment etc., the petitioner herein (A1) along with A2 was found to be in possession of 39000 packets of Hans stored in the rental premises owned by another person and that the Police party has recovered the same on 26.10.2019 at 7 p.m and has registered the case. The petitioner has been arrested in this case on 27.10.2019 and after his remand, has been under detention since then.
2. Sri. K.V. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the offences as per Sections 6 and 24 of the B.A.No.8209/2019 3 Tobacco Act and Section 118(i) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011 are bailable offences and that the only non-bailable offence included in this case is the one as per Section 77 of the J.J. Act, 2015. It is pointed out that there are no allegations anywhere in the F.I.R that the petitioner has caused sale of any such tobacco products like Hans to any school children or that they had intended to do so or that the place from where it is said to have been alleged by the Court is near or proximate to the school etc. where the students below the age of 18 years are studying and that therefore, the offence as per Section 77 of the J.J. Act, 2015 is not brought out going by the admitted allegations of the prosecution case. Further it is pointed out that as the petitioner has already suffered detention in this case for the last 19 days, this Court may order to release him on regular bail subject to stringent conditions and his further detention may not be necessary.
3. The learned Public Prosecutor has seriously opposed the plea for regular bail and has pointed out that the quantity of the Hans recovered in this case comes to 39000 packets etc.
4. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the aspects highlighted herein above by the petitioner and also as the petitioner has already suffered detention for the last 19 days, this Court is inclined to take the view that his further incarceration could be avoided subject to B.A.No.8209/2019 4 stringent conditions. The learned Public Prosecutor would caution this Court that there is every likelihood of the petitioner repeating such offences, if he is let off on bail. Taking note of the above said apprehension raised by the prosecution, it is ordered as a safeguard that the petitioner shall not commit any offences, while he is on bail and if he commits any offence of similar nature, then the Investigating Officer will immediately file a detailed report before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court concerned, who stands hereby authorised to consider the plea for cancellation of bail and the said Court will consider and pass orders on any such application, after hearing both sides. Accordingly, the following directions and orders are passed:
(i). The petitioner will report before the Investigating Officer concerned at any time between 9:00 a.m. and 1 p.m. on every 2 nd and 4th Saturdays, for the next six months. Thereafter, the petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the said officer.
(ii). The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation process and shall not tamper with the evidence.
(iii). The petitioner shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
(iv) The petitioner shall not commit any offences, while he is on bail and if he commits any offence of similar nature, then the Investigating Officer will immediately file a detailed report before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court concerned, who stands hereby authorised to consider the plea for cancellation of bail and the said Court will consider and pass orders on any such application, after hearing both sides.B.A.No.8209/2019 5
5. In case, the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court concerned will stand hereby empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if required, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
With these observations and directions, the above Bail Application will stand disposed of.
sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
acd