IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 703 of 2008() ---------------------------- FIR NO.28/08 OF IDUKKI POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ------------------- SAJEEVAN, S/O. THANKAPPAN, AGED 45 YEARS, KOTTUR HOUSE, CHETTIKUZHY KARA, MARIYAPURAM, THANKAMANI VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVASIA RESPONDENTS: ------------- S.I. OF POLICE, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 703 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under Sec.55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner claims to be a political activist. His wife is a political leader, she having been elected as the Panchayat Member of the Mariyapuram Panchayat for two terms. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that when the police party, on receipt of discreet information, went to an item of property belonging to the brother of the petitioner and which is being managed by the petitioner, they found 50 litres of Wash kept openly in the said property on 21/1/08. Admittedly, the petitioner was not present at the scene of crime. On the basis of prior information received, the police appears to have assumed that the property belongs to the petitioner and the B.A. No. 703 OF 2008 -: 2 :- petitioner was arrayed as an accused. Investigation now reveals that the petitioner is not the owner of the property; but his brother is the owner of the property. It is now the case of the prosecution that though the property does not belong to the petitioner, he is keeping possession and managing the property on behalf of his brother. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the fact that the property belongs to the brother of the petitioner; but he contends that the petitioner has nothing to do with the contraband articles kept openly in such property. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the persons politically inimical towards the petitioner and his wife must have planted such articles and informed the police so that they could vex and harass the petitioner and his wife. It is only for this purpose that such allegation has been raised. The manner in which the articles are allegedly found in the property as also the circumstance that some one had passed on the information to the police earlier must generate suspicion and reservation in the mind of the court, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner assets and the learned Public Prosecutor does not controvert that assertion that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents whatsoever. B.A. No. 703 OF 2008 -: 3 :- 3. Having rendered my very anxious consideration to the circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail subject to appropriate terms and conditions. I have come to this conclusion after perusing the Case Diary in detail and I find no statement of any witnesses recorded available in the Case Diary which can suggest that the petitioner was present in the premises at any time before the police visited the area on the date in question. Appropriate conditions can, of course, be imposed on the petitioner to ensure a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation. 4. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 15/2/08. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 16/2/08 and 18/2/08. Thereafter the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one B.A. No. 703 OF 2008 -: 4 :- month. Subsequently, he shall so make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all; (iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 15/2/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15/2/08. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge B.A. No. 703 OF 2008 -: 5 :-