IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2009 / 30TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 180 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRIME NO998/08 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS -------------------- 1. SHAJI.K.MATHEW @ SHAJI AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.MATHAI, KUNNATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE MANJADI, MEENTHALAKKARI MURI, KUTTAPPUZHA VILLAGE THIRUVALLA. 2. SHIBU MATHEW @ SHIBU, AGED 36 YEARS S/O.MATHAI, KUNNATHUPARAMBIL HOUSE MANJADI, MEENTHALAKKARI MURI, KUTTAPPUZHA VILLAGE THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM ,REPRESENTING THE S.I.OF POLICE THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 180 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Section 447, 323, 436 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioners, who are accused 1 and 2, along with two others, trespassed into the property, which is in the possession of de facto complainant and set fire to the building which was in the possession of one Joseph Antony on 28.12.2008 at about 5.30 a.m. De facto complainant is the security guard of the said Antony and allegedly he was assaulted by the accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that no incident as alleged took place on the date and time. Petitioners are absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The building belongs to the father of petitioners and there is a long pending litigation between him and the above said Antony, who claimed himself to be the tenant where he is only the trespasser. On the date of occurrence, the said Antony set fire his own BA.180/09 2 building with a view to defeat the rights of petitioners and see that petitioners are detained in prison by filing false complaint. Within two days of the incident, he re-constructed the building to a very big one and also got it inaugurated on 30.12.2008 itself on the second day of incident. This would indicate that everything was preplanned, but it is made to appear that petitioners have set fire to the building. The allegation is that after waking up de facto complainant, who is the security, and telling him that they were setting fire to the building etc. the building was set ablaze, which is highly improbable. 4. It is also submitted that after setting fire to the building, the said Antony had given a complaint to the police and petitioners were arrested from their own house, within half an hour of the incident, at 6 a.m. It is highly improbable that if petitioners were guilty, they would not sleep in their own house, after setting fire to the building at 5.30 a.m that too, after informing the security and beating him. All these facts would indicate that there was a calculated move from the side of the said Antony to see that petitioners are arrested and BA.180/09 3 kept in jail, by setting fire his own building and making false complaint. 5. The fact that the said Antony had an intention to set fire to the building and also to act in this manner is revealed from his previous conduct which is referred to an Annexure-A. A complaint was given by first petitioner to the Circle Inspector of Police when said Antony had threatened him on 12.2.2008 that he will set fire to himself from the building and that he would not allow the owner to construct any building. A complaint was lodged before the Circle Inspector of Police. Petitioners are in custody from 20.8.2008 onwards and hence, bail may be granted to them, it is submitted by learned counsel for petitioners. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the stage of investigation he has no objection in granting bail to petitioners. 7. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that bail can be granted to petitioners, without any delay. BA.180/09 4 Hence, bail is granted to petitioners on the following terms and conditions: i) Petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court concerned. ii) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. iii). Petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witnesses or intimidate them or commit any offence while on bail and in case of breach of this condition, the bail is liable to be cancelled. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.