IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5116 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.497/2008 OF CHOKLI POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/12TH ACCUSED -------------------------------------------- SATHEESAN N.K.,S/O. CHATHUKUTTY, NADUKANDY HOUSE, CHAMPAD AMSOM DESOM, CHAMPAD P.O., THALASSERY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOKLY POLICE STATION. 2. STATE REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5116 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.12 in Crime No.497 of 2008 of Chokli Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 201, 294(b) & 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3 & 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and Section 4 of the PDPP Act. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 14th September 2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and also having considered the order in B.A.No.7692/2008 dated 15.1.2009, I am of the view that the petitioner can be directed to appear before the Circle Inspector of Police, Panoor for questioning. The petitioner shall appear before the Circle Inspector of Police, Panoor on 23rd September, 2009 at 9 A.M. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.497/2009 of Chokli Police Station until further orders.” 4. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner that the directions in the order dated 14th September 2009 were complied with by BA No.5116/2009 2 the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl