IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2010 / 12TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 465 of 2010 CRIME NO.3 OF 2010 OF KADAVANTHRA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3: ----------------------------------------------- 1. SUBRAMANIAN @ JOSE, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.RAMASWAMY, H.NO.39, UDAYATHIL HOUSE, UDAYA COLONY, GANDHINAGAR, ERNAKULAM, NOW RESIDING AT C/O.MADHU, SHENOY ROAD, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUNEESH @ ANTONY, AGED 24 YEARS, S/O.JOSE, NO.39, UDAYATHIL HOUSE, UDAYA COLONY, GANDHINAGAR, ERNAKULAM. 3. SUNIL @ JOHN, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.JOSE, NO.39, UDAYATHIL HOUSE, UDAYA COLONY, GANDINAGAR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.JOSEPH MANAVALAN SRI.P.A.MARTIN ROY RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAVANTHRA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 465 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of February, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are the accused persons in Crime No.3 of 2010 of Kadavanthra Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: On 31.12.2009, the petitioners, who are father and sons, demanded Rs.1,000/- from the de facto complainant, who is a taxi driver attached to R.G.Travels, Ernakulam. The de facto complainant was asked by the accused to get the amount from R.G.Travels. The demand was for the purpose of celebrating new year. During the night on 31.12.2009, the accused persons approached the de facto complainant for money. The de facto complainant stated that he was not in a position to give any amount. Infuriated by this stand, the B.A. NO. 465 OF 2010 :: 2 :: accused persons doused in kerosene the de facto complainant and some other taxi drivers who were available in Kadavanthra taxi stand. The second accused poured kerosene in his T-Shirt, ignited the same and threw it towards the de facto complainant and others. Since the de facto complainant and other taxi drivers ran away, they did not sustain any burn injuries. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that accused Nos.2 and 3 are involved in various crimes. However, information is given only in respect of accused No.2 being involved in Crime No.1469 of 2009 of Central Police Station, wherein the offence alleged against him is under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code. The details in respect of the crimes registered against the third accused are not furnished. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case was foisted against the petitioners. The third accused was abused by the de facto complainant. The petitioners approached the de facto complainant and asked why the third accused was abused. There was no incident as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioners are falsely implicated in the case. B.A. NO. 465 OF 2010 :: 3 :: 6. For the purpose of disposing of this application for bail, it is not necessary to arrive at any conclusion as to whether the case put forward by the prosecution or that put forward by the accused is true. If such a course is adopted, it would cause prejudice either to the prosecution or to the defence. 7. As pointed out by the learned Public Prosecutor, the second petitioner (second accused) is involved in Crime No.1469 of 2009. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the second petitioner (second accused) is released on bail at this stage, he would indulge in similar criminal activities. However, I am inclined to grant bail to petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) on stringent conditions. 8. Petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class – II, Ernakulam, subject to the following conditions: B.A. NO. 465 OF 2010 :: 4 :: a) Petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays and Thursdays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) Petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) Petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) Petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) 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 in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 3 (accused Nos.1 and 3) and it is dismissed in so far as it relates to the second petitioner (second accused). (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/