IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2008 / 25TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4595 of 2008(D) ------------------------------------- CRIME NUMBER NOT KNOWN OF THE WANDOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONERS : ----------------- 1. P.T.AHAMMEDKUTTY, S/O.P.T.MUHAMMED, KARUKANDI HOUSE, PUTHOORPALLIKKAL P.O. THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. HAMZA C.T., S/O.ALAVI KUTTY HAJI, C.T.HOUSE, KODINJI ROAD, CHEMMAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR RESPONDENTS : ------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WANDOOR POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.4595 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of October, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. According to prosecution, the first accused committed theft of gold ornaments and it was received by the petitioners knowing the the articles to be stolen and hence a crime was registered under Sections 379 and 411 and 34 of I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are being harassed unnecessarily by the respondent police and they were forced to part with gold ingots. They were directed to hand over gold ingots of 8 ½ sovereigns and 2 sovereigns. When they refused to do so, they were threatened that they will be implicated in theft cases. Since they were apprehending arrest by false implications, this petition is filed. 4. It is also pointed out that this petition was filed as early as on 14.07.2008 and when the case came up for hearing on 21.07.2008, it was submitted that the petitioners are not accused in the crime and this Court passed orders but before signing the B.A.4595 of 2008 2 same, it was brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Public Prosecutor that as per the subsequent report received, the petitioners were implicated in the offence. These facts themselves will reveal that the petitioners were falsely implicated subsequently. It is also submitted that there is a government circular which mandates the police officer to verify the records and registers at the shops to confirm whether the stolen articles are received. It is only after confirmation that the action can be taken against the petitioners. But no inspection was done by the police officers. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners cannot claim any benefit on the basis of the submissions made on behalf of the respondent, since as per the report dated 18.07.2008, the petitioners were not implicated. But on the same day, another report dated 19.07.2008 was received, wherein, it stated that the petitioners are arrayed as accused. At the time of hearing, the report dated 19.07.2008 was not received and that is why a submission was made that the petitioners were not accused in the crime. As per the case diary, on 17.07.2008, the B.A.4595 of 2008 3 first accused as arrested and he had confessed that when ornaments were sold in 2 shops in Kondotti and on investigation it is revealed that those articles were sold in the petitioners' shops and hence the petitioners were also arrayed as accused. On hearing both sides, it appears that the arrest of the first accused was made only on 17.07.2008, that is, after three days of filing of anticipatory bail application. But in this petition, the petitioners specifically alleged that there is an attempt to implicate the petitioners falsely and they were directed to produce gold ingots alleging that some gold ornaments were received by them from the accused. It is clear from the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor that the arrest itself was made only on 17.07.2008 and the petitioners were implicated only after on 17.07.2008. In such circumstances, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed : The petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned within seven days B.A.4595 of 2008 4 from today and they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions : i. The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation and make themselves available for interrogation. ii. The petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac