IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 82 of 2010 CRIME NO.559 OF 2009 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM. PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- RAJESH, S/O. UDHAYAKUMAR, AGED 27, DEVI PRIYA, T.C.18/1435 (1), KUNNAPUZHA.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH KRISHNAN RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 82 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010 O R D E R When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 1.2.2010, the following order was passed: “This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the third accused in Crime No. 559/2009 of Poojappura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 323, 324 and 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The Prosecution case is that on 29/12/2009 at about 11P.M., while the de facto complainant was standing near a Pan Shop, he was attacked by accused Nos. 1 to 3. The de facto complainant had questioned the acts of the accused persons of taking alcoholic drinks in a barren land near his house causing disturbance to the local people. The de facto complainant was attacked on account of this rivalry. It is alleged that accused No. 1 attacked the de facto complainant with an iron rod and accused Nos. 2 and 3 B.A. NO. 82 OF 2010 :: 2 :: beat him with hands. The de facto complainant sustained grievous injuries including fracture. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even if the prosecution case is accepted as true, it can be seen that the grievous injuries sustained by the de facto complainant were not attributable to the acts alleged against accused Nos. 2 and 3. It is also submitted that accused No.1 was arrested and he was released on bail. 5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor,I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 8th and 9th February, 2010. 6. Post on 15/02/2010. 7. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No. 559 of 2009 of Poojappura Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. B.A. NO. 82 OF 2010 :: 3 :: The petitioner shall produce copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 1.2.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner. 3. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 1.2.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner, 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.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; B.A. NO. 82 OF 2010 :: 4 :: d) 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 ahz/