IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8700 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1195/2011 OF KORATTY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED : -------------------------- SABIRA KARIM, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.ABDUL KARIM, KADOMBOTTIL HOUSE, KOLAZHY P.O., THRISSUR-680010. BY ADV. SRI.BENOY K.KADAVAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KORATTY POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DITRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.REMA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2011, ALONG WITH BA NO.8863 OF 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------- B.A.Nos.8700 & 8863 of 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of November, 2011 O R D E R These are applications for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner in B.A.No.8700 of 2011 is accused No.1 in Crime No.1195 of 2011 of Koratty Police Station. The petitioner in B.A.No.8863 of 2011 is accused No.2 in that Crime. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 65 and 66 of the Information Technology Act and Sections 406 and 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Applications came up for admission on 8.11.2011, the following order was passed : “3. The de facto complainant filed a complaint before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class I, Chalakkudy, which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of BA Nos.8700 & 8863/11 2 Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the Crime was registered. It is stated by the de facto complainant that the petitioners were working in a private limited company, of which, the de facto complainant is the Managing Director. The services of the petitioners were terminated. It is alleged that several important data available in the Server of the company were deleted unauthorisedly by the accused persons thereby causing heavy loss to the company. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they never did any offending acts and their services were terminated on unjustifiable grounds. According to the petitioners, no proper notice was given to them before termination of service and therefore, they were entitled to get salary for the notice period. It is also stated that they filed a petition before the Labour Officer. That matter was settled between the parties. It is submitted that the present complaint is filed only to wreak vengeance against the petitioners. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the de facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioners should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the BA Nos.8700 & 8863/11 3 petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 12th and 13th November, 2011. 7. Post on 17th November, 2011. 8. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.1195 of 2011 of Koratty Police Station, till 22nd November, 2011. 9. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 8.11.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners. 5. 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 8.11.2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. BA Nos.8700 & 8863/11 4 There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for ` 10,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions : A) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required ; B) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ; C) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; D) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Applications are allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl