Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 48 (KER)

Mohammed Abdul Jabbar v. State of Kerala

2023-01-13

K.BABU

body2023
ORDER : K. Babu, J. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. Petitioners are accused Nos.2 & 3 in Crime No.1055/2022 of Manjeri Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioners and others are punishable under Section 3 read with Sections 21(1), 21(2), Section 5 r/w Section 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, Section 3 r/w Section 17 of the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958 and Section 3 r/w Section 9(1)(a) of the Kerala Prohibition of Charging Exorbitant Interest Act,2012. 3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and the other accused collected money from different persons in connection with a scheme named “Ente Usthadinu Oru Veed” under the banner of a charitable trust. It is alleged that the petitioners and the other accused collected a sum of Rs.58,50,000/- and thereby obtained wrongful gain. The petitioners were arrested on 22.11.2022, and have in judicial custody since then. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent of the allegations levelled against them. It is contended that the petitioners have not intentionally committed any offence. The investigation is almost in the final stage and further detention of the petitioners is not required. 6. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea of the petitioners. 7. The prosecution failed to place any materials warranting further detention of the petitioners. 8. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception has been well recognised by judicial pronouncements. This is the principle underlined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 9. There cannot be an inexorable formula in the matter of granting bail. The facts and circumstances of each case will govern the exercise of judicial discretion in granting or cancelling bail. (Vide: Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978) 1 SCC 118 )). 10. The issue of bail is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden of the public treasury, all of which insist that a developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitised judicial process. (Vide: Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978) 1 SCC 118 )). 10. The issue of bail is one of liberty, justice, public safety and burden of the public treasury, all of which insist that a developed jurisprudence of bail is integral to a socially sensitised judicial process. Personal liberty, deprived when bail is refused, is too precious a value of our constitutional system recognised under Article 21 that the curial power to negate it is a great trust exercisable, not casually but judicially, with lively concern for the cost to the individual and the community. After all, personal liberty of an accused or convict is fundamental, suffering lawful eclipse only in terms of “procedure established by law” (Vide: Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. State (1978) 1 SCC 240 )). 11. Having considered the entire circumstances, including the stage of investigation and the tenure of judicial custody undegone by the petitioners, in the touchstone of the principles discussed above, the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail on conditions. 12. In the result, this Bail Application is allowed as follows :- (i) The petitioners shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. (ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Wednesdays between 10 A.M. and 11 A.M. till the final report is filed. (iii) The petitioners shall surrender their passports before the jurisdictional Court within a period of two weeks from the date of their release. If they do not have a passport, they shall file an affidavit to that effect. (iv) The petitioners shall not leave the State of Kerala without the permission of the jurisdictional Court. (v) The petitioners shall co-operate with the Investigating agency. (vi) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or attempt to tamper with the evidence. (vii) If any of the bail conditions are violated by the petitioners, the jurisdictional Court will be at liberty to cancel the bail in accordance with law.