IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4955 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.461/08 OF VAIKOM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS : ACCUSED 1 TO 3 ------------------------------- 1. V.K. RAJEEV, VETTOOR HOUSE, KUDAVECHOOR.P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. 2. ANTONY ANTONY, ARAYIL HOUSE, CHEEPUMKAL.P.O, KOTTAYAM. 3. PRAJEESH, S/O. KARTHIKEYAN, THANGATTU HOUSE, KUDAVECHOOR.P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VAIKOM POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.4955 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 341, 353 and 225 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, on 9.7.2008 at about 3.15 PM, the de facto complainant, who is a Motor Vehicle Inspector, was checking vehicles and the jeep, belonging to the first petitioner, was seized, on the failure of the driver of the vehicle to produce the records. When the jeep was about to be taken to the police station, two persons came in a car and blocked the way and forcefully taken the vehicle from the possession of the de facto complainant and thereby accused 1 to 3 committed various offences. 3. Petitioners are accused 1 to 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the third accused was driving the vehicle and it was checked by the de facto complainant. R.C book was not available in the vehicle and hence, he immediately informed the RC owner, who is the first petitioner in this case. He came to the spot immediately with the documents and though the documents were shown to the de facto complainant, he pretended to be not satisfied with the documents and demanded bribe of Rs.5,000/-. The BA.4955/08 2 petitioners were not prepared to give the money while there was an altercation and the accused were assaulted by the de facto complainant and his associates. They were also abused in public and they also sustained injuries and got admitted in the hospital on the same day. The medical certificates are Annexures C and D. 4. Though intimation was given, no crime is registered by the police. On the other hand, on a complaint given by the de facto complainant falsely at about 7 PM on 9.7.2008, a crime is registered against the petitioners. Though the incident happened at about 3.15 PM, the complaint was given only at 7 PM, after knowing that the petitioners were hospitalised, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners may be directed to appear before the investigating officer and subject to that, he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer within seven days from today and in the event of their arrest, they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, on the following conditions: BA.4955/08 3 i) Petitioners shall subject themselves to interrogation by the police. ii) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. iii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.