‘Personal liberty cherished right’: Kerala High Court grants bail to orphanage trust founder accused in 500 cheating cases

The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by Kumar, the founder and executive director of an orphanage trust.

It was placed on record that Kumar was first arrested in March in connection with similar cases and has remained in custody since then, and that he has around 500 cheating cases against him which are identical and have allegations of cheating several complainants by promising to supply various articles at half the actual market value.

The court, observing that no final reports had been filed in the case so far, noted that the FIRs were initially registered at local police stations, and the investigations were subsequently transferred to the crime branch.

In its December 18 order, the court granted bail to Kumar on the condition of executing a personal bond of Rs 50,000, considering the peculiar nature of the case, and instructed him not to intimidate or attempt to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence.

Balancing liberty, investigative right

Personal liberty is one of the “cherished rights” of an individual, highlighted the court, while mentioning that when a person is named as an accused in a non-bailable offence, the courts, while considering the question of grant of bail must balance the “liberty” of the individual and the “investigational right” of the police.

“A balance will have to be struck between two conflicting demands – the needs of the investigation and the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty,” the court added.

Justice Thomas also underlined that the courts must always bear in mind that an accused should not be detained in custody with the object of “punishing” him, as punishment is always the consequence of a finding of “guilt”.

Arguments

Public prosecutor, M K Pushpalatha, representing the state, argued that Anand is named an accused in more than 500 cases all over the state, which are now being investigated by the Crime Branch, Crime Investigation Department (CBCID).

Pushpalatha further pointed out that he should not be released on bail as the “extent of his involvement” can be identified only after the completion of the investigation.

On the contrary, Anand’s counsel, advocate S Rajeev, argued that the continued detention of his client does not serve any purpose and should be released on bail.