2025:KER:29989 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 CRIME NO.188/2025 OF Kattoor Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER/S: THOMAS JOHN AGED 53 YEARS S/O T.T JOHN, THUMBOLIL HOUSE, PC KAVALA P.O, PAIPPAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686537 BY ADVS. GERRY DOUGLES S. SONAM GERRY RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SHO, KATTOOR PS REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SR PP-NOUSHAD K A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4690/2025, 4696/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4690 OF 2025 CRIME NO.178/2025 OF Cherpu Police Station, Thrissur PETITIONER/S: THOMAS JOHN AGED 53 YEARS S/O T.T JOHN, THUMBOLIL HOUSE, PC KAVALA P.O, PAIPPAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686537 BY ADVS. GERRY DOUGLES S. SONAM GERRY RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SHO, CHERPU PS REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SR PP-NOUSHAD K A THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4737/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4696 OF 2025 CRIME NO.94/2025 OF Pothanikadu Police Station, Ernakulam PETITIONER/S: THOMAS JOHN AGED 53 YEARS S/O T.T JOHN, THUMBOLIL HOUSE, PC KAVALA P.O, PAIPPAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686537 BY ADVS. GERRY DOUGLES S. SONAM GERRY RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SHO POTHANIKAD PS REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 PP-G SUDHEER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4737/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4771 OF 2025 CRIME NO.98/2025 OF Pulpally Police Station, Wayanad PETITIONER/S: THOMAS JOHN AGED 53 YEARS S/O T.T JOHN, THUMBOLIL HOUSE, PC KAVALA P.O, PAIPPAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686537 BY ADVS. GERRY DOUGLES S. SONAM GERRY RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SHO, PULPALLI PS REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SR PP-HRITHWIK C S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4737/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 4782 OF 2025 CRIME NO.231/2025 OF Gandhinagar Police Station, Kottayam PETITIONER/S: THOMAS JOHN AGED 53 YEARS S/O T.T JOHN, THUMBOLIL HOUSE, PC KAVALA P.O, PAIPPAD, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686537 BY ADVS. GERRY DOUGLES S. SONAM GERRY RESPONDENT/S: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 SHO, GANDHI NAGAR PS, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 SR PP-HRITHWIK C S THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..4737/2025 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 6 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J -------------------------------- B.A.Nos.4737, 4690, 4696, 4771 & 4782 of 2025 ------------------------------- Dated this the 07th day of April, 2025 C O M M O N O R D E R These Bail Applications are filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Petitioner in these cases are one and the same. Therefore, I am disposing of these cases by a common order. 2. Petitioner is an accused in Crime Nos.188/2025 of Kattoor Police Station, 178/2025 of Cherpu Police Station, 94/2025 of Pothanikadu Police Station, 98/2025 of Pulpally Police Station & 231/2025 of Gandhinagar Police Station. The above cases are registered inter alia under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that, the accused cheated the defacto complainant in these cases by offering visa and job in U.K, New Zeland and Australia. The visa or the 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 7 job is not provided and the amount collected is not returned. Hence, it is alleged that the accused committed the offence. 4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. 5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner is in custody from 03.02.2025 and petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions, if this Court grants him bail. 6. Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application. 7. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that the allegations against the petitioner is very serious. The petitioner was first arrested on 03.02.2025, in connection with Crime No.897/2024 of Anchal Police Station. Thereafter, the arrest of the petitioner recorded in these cases on separate dates. The petitioner is in custody from 03.02.2025. Indefinite incarceration of the petitioner may not not be necessary. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I think, the petitioner can be released on bail after imposing stringent 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 8 conditions. 8. 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. 9. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of India [2024 KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must mention here that the Special Court and the High Court did not consider the material in the charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the appellant's case could not be properly appreciated. When a case is made out for a 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 9 grant of bail, the Courts should not have any hesitation in granting bail. The allegations of the prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in a case like the present case where there are stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with only modification that the bail can be granted if the conditions in the statute are satisfied. The rule also means that once a case is made out for the grant of bail, the Court cannot decline to grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in deserving cases, it will be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our Constitution.” (underline supplied) 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 10 10. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that: “53. The Court further observed that, over a period of time, the trial courts and the High Courts have forgotten a very well - settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. From our experience, we can say that it appears that the trial courts and the High Courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an exception is, at times, followed in breach. On account of non - grant of bail even in straight forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial courts and the High Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is rule and jail is exception". 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 11 Considering the dictum laid down in the above decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Bail Application is allowed with the following directions: 1. Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. 2. 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. 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 12 3. Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court. 4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. 5. The observations and findings in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this bail application. The principle laid down by this Court in Anzar Azeez v. State of Kerala [2025 SCC OnLine KER 1260] is applicable in this case also. 6. 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. The prosecution and the victim are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional court to cancel 2025:KER:29989 BAIL APPL. NO. 4737 OF 2025 & connected cases 13 the bail, if there is any violation of the above conditions. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SSG