Kerala High Court Grants Bail to Jinto P D in Trespass and Theft Case
Bail granted with strict conditions, highlighting partnership dispute and questioning the necessity of custodial interrogation.
In a significant development, the Kerala High Court has granted bail to Jinto P D, the accused in a trespass and theft case registered under Crime No. 592 of 2025 at Palarivattom Police Station. The bail application was considered by Mr. Bechu Kurian Thomas, J., who emphasized the lack of necessity for custodial interrogation in this case. The petitioner, Jinto P D, was accused of trespassing into the establishment "Jinto Body Craft," allegedly damaging CCTV cameras, stealing Rs. 10,000, and important documents.
The court's decision was influenced by an existing agreement between Jinto P D and the de facto complainant, indicating a partnership arrangement for the business, "Jinto Body Craft." As per the agreement dated 14.10.2024, Jinto P D was entitled to 60% of the profits, with the complainant receiving the remaining 40%. This agreement raised questions about the allegations of theft and damage, suggesting a possible business dispute rather than a criminal act.
The prosecution, represented by Sri Prasanth M.P., Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail application, asserting the need for custodial interrogation. However, the court referred to the precedent set in Ashok Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, [2024 SCC Online SC 274], which requires the State to demonstrate more than a prima facie case to justify custodial interrogation.
After considering the arguments, the court granted bail with several conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation. Jinto P D is required to appear before the Investigating Officer on 08.10.2025 for interrogation. If the officer decides to arrest him post-interrogation, he must be released on executing a bond of Rs. 50,000 with two solvent sureties. Additional conditions include the requirement for Jinto P D to cooperate with the investigation, refrain from intimidating witnesses, tampering with evidence, or committing similar offenses while on bail.
The court emphasized that any violation of these conditions or requests for modifications would be addressed by the jurisdictional court, which retains the authority to amend the bail conditions as needed.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's careful consideration of the necessity of custodial interrogation and the importance of evaluating the context of alleged offenses, especially when business disputes may be involved.
Bottom Line:
Bail application under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Custodial interrogation deemed unnecessary - Bail granted with conditions ensuring cooperation in investigation, prevention of intimidation of witnesses, and prohibition of similar offenses.
Statutory provision(s): Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Sections 331 and 305 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Jinto P D. v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2790184
