STATE OF KERALA v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019 (16) SCALE 870), after considering all the earlier & Anr.

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI, PIN - 682031 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER VENGARA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN – 676304 BY SRI.PRASHANTH M.P, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

16.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: B.A. No.2818 of 2024 2 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.2818 of 2024 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of of April, 2024

O R D E R Petitioner is one of the accused in Crime No.309/2024 of Vengara Police Station. The above case is registered alleging offences punishable under Section 286 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4(b) read with Section 5 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1908 [for brevity, ‘the Act’].

The prosecution case is that on 29.03.2024 the 2nd respondent and party were on a patrol duty and they received an information that in a place called Erumappara in Oorakkam Grama Panchayat an unauthorised granite quarry is functioning and when the police party reached there, some people, who were engaged in the work, were ran away. An autorickshaw driver had given a statement to the B.A. No.2818 of 2024 3 police, stating that the petitioner is conducting the quarry. Hence it is alleged that the accused committed the offence.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence under Section 286 IPC is bailable. According to the petitioner, to attract the offence under Section 2(a) of the Act, articles seized must be a material for making any explosive substance. It is also submitted that in order to attract special category of explosives substance, the same shall be the substances mentioned in Section 2(b) of the Act. It is submitted that there is no such materials have been seized in the present case. According to the petitioner, at the maximum, the offence under Section 9B of the Explosives Act, 1884 may attract B.A. No.2818 of 2024 4 and which is a bailable one. It is also submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court granted bail to another accused in another crime as evident by Annexure B order.

The learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application and submits that serious allegations are there against the petitioner and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the contentions raised by the petitioner, I think a prima facie case is made out by the petitioner. Any way, these are matters to be investigated by the Investigating Officer.

After hearing both sides, I am of the considered opinion that this bail application can be allowed with stringent conditions. B.A. No.2818 of 2024 5

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.