IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2008 / 16TH SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4857 of 2008() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.3933/2008 Dated 27/06/2008 CRIME NO. 460/2008 OF TIRUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED:- --------------------------- SANEER,S/O. MUHAMMAD SAHALU KIZHAKKEVEETTIL, ELATHUPADY DESOM EDAVANAKKAD VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM BY ADV. SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE TIRUR POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4857 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of August, 2008 O R D E R Application for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 120B and 395 IPC. According to the prosecution, on 30-4-2008 at about 5.45 p.m. petitioner and others who were travelling in a Maruthi Car, overtook the car driven by the defacto-complainant and stopped the vehicle, robbed gold ornaments worth Rs.60 lakhs and an amount of Rs.2,70,000/- and the car, in which the defacto-complainant was driving, was taken away by the other accused. The Maruthi car was driven by the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that no article was recovered from the petitioner. According to him, the petitioner is only a driver by profession. His assistance was requested stating that a vehicle, which was hypothecated, had to be taken into possession, but he did not know that there was attempt to commit the present offence. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the records, the petitioner also received Rs.5,000/- out of the amount stolen. However, no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. He was arrested on 23-5-2008 and he is in custody for the past 75 days. Charge-sheet has not been laid. On BA 4857/08 -2- the facts of this case, the role of the other accused is different from the role of the petitioner. In the above, circumstances, I find that petitioner can be granted bail on stringent conditions. 5. Hence, the following order is passed:- 1) The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. 2) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer on every Monday and Thursday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. until further orders. 3) The petitioner shall not leave the limits of the police station within which the crime is registered except with the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. 4) The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail and in case breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. The application is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.