IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 29TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 684 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.28/08 OF KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ----------------------------------------------- 1. CHARLY CHACKO, AGED 41, S/O.N.S.CHACKO, NAMBELIL HOUSE, OLIYAPPURAM KARA, THIRUMARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. N.S.CHACKO, NAMBELIL HOUSE, OLIYAPPURAM KARA, THIRUMARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 684 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioners are accused 1 and 2 named in the F.I.R. They face allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 326 r/w. 34 I.P.C. Altogether there are four accused persons involved in the offence as per the allegations under the F.I. statement. 2. The learned Prosecutor submits that at the moment there are only two persons arrayed as accused. The first accused is the first petitioner in this case. The second accused is the wife of the first accused. The second petitioner though named as the second accused in the F.I. statement and the F.I.R., subsequent investigation has revealed that he has no complicity and he has been deleted from the array of accused. The apprehension of the said second petitioner is hence found to be without any merit. B.A.No. 684 of 2008 2 This petition in so far as it relates to the second petitioner can be dismissed making note of the submission that the second petitioner is not required to be arrested at all. 3. As regard the first petitioner/A1, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that totally different allegations have been raised in the F.I. statement than what is now advanced before the Investigating Officer. The learned Prosecutor also submits that it is so. There is a long standing civil dispute and animosity between the parties. The counsel submits that because of such animosity vexatious allegations are being raised. Though a counter case as such has not been registered, the learned Prosecutor submits that counter allegations have been raised against the defacto complainant, but no crime has been registered as the said allegations do not reveal the commission of any cognizable offence. 4. The learned counsel in these circumstances prays that anticipatory bail may be granted to the first petitioner. The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case appropriate conditions may be imposed to ensure a fair and exhaustive investigation, submits the Prosecutor. B.A.No. 684 of 2008 3 I am satisfied that the request can be accepted. 5. In the result: (1) This application in so far as it relates to the second petitioner (A2) is dismissed accepting the submissions/undertaking of the learned Prosecutor that the second petitioner is not required to be and shall not be arrested in this crime. (2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the first petitioner(A1). (a) The first petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on 25.2.2008 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the first petitioner on regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (b) He shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. on 26.2.2008 and 27.2.2008 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (c) If the first petitioner does not appear before the learned B.A.No. 684 of 2008 4 Magistrate as directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 25.2.08 and the police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law. (d) If the first petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 25.2.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any surety undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 25.2.2008. (R. BASANT) Judge tm