Kerala High Court Grants Bail To Accused Caught In ₹5,000 Land Tax Bribery Trap By Vigilance
In an alleged bribe demand case of ₹5,000 for effecting mutation of property and payment of land tax, the Kerala High Court has granted bail to the accused after noting that the investigation was practically over and the petitioner had been in custody for more than 25 days. The order was passed by Justice Muralee Krishna S. while allowing a bail application filed by the sole accused...
In an alleged bribe demand case of ₹5,000 for effecting mutation of property and payment of land tax, the Kerala High Court has granted bail to the accused after noting that the investigation was practically over and the petitioner had been in custody for more than 25 days.
The order was passed by Justice Muralee Krishna S. while allowing a bail application filed by the sole accused in Crime No. VC.22/2025 of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (VACB), Ernakulam.
The bail plea was moved challenging the earlier rejection of bail by the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Muvattupuzha.
According to the prosecution, the accused, a public servant, allegedly demanded a bribe of ₹5,000 from the complainant for facilitating mutation of property records and payment of land tax. It was alleged that on 28 November 2015, the accused accepted the bribe amount and was caught red-handed by vigilance officials. Based on these allegations, the VACB registered a case under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Following his arrest, the accused was remanded to judicial custody. His bail application was earlier dismissed by the Special Court, leading to the present proceedings before the High Court.
The Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the accused had already undergone more than 25 days of judicial custody and that the investigation in the matter was nearly complete. It was contended that continued incarceration was unnecessary and that the petitioner was willing to cooperate fully with the investigation.
The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea but submitted that, if the Court was inclined to grant bail, stringent conditions should be imposed to ensure the integrity of the investigation and prevent any misuse of liberty.
After hearing both sides, the High Court reiterated the settled principle that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception.”
Considering the facts of the case, the limited amount involved, the period of custody already undergone, and the stage of the investigation, the Court held that the petitioner had made out a case for grant of bail.
The High Court allowed the bail application and directed the release of the accused on execution of a bond for ₹50,000 with two solvent sureties.
Case Title: Jiby Mathew M v. State of Kerala
Case Number: BAIL APPL. NO. 14514 OF 2025
Counsel for Petitioner: Advocates Mathew Kuriakose, T.G.Sunil (Perumbavoor), J.Krishnakumar (Adoor), C.N.Prakash, Shaji P.K, Arun.S and Preethu Jagathy
Counsel for Respondent: Public Prosecutor