IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6454 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRMP.2333/2009 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT,KOTTAYAM CRIME NO.409/2009 OF KARUKACHAL POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------------ 1. SHAJI POTHEN AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.POTHEN, KARINGADA HOUSE, MANTHURUTHI, NEDUMKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM. 2. SHAJI POTHEN AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.POTHEN, KARINGADA HOUSE, MANTHURUTHI, 3. SIBI, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. K.J.JOHN KUZHIMANNIL, PUNNAVELI P.O.,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.RENJIT JOHN SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6454 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009 O R D E R When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 08/12/2009, the following order was passed: “ This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in Crime No. 409/2009 of Karukachal Police Station, Kottayam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326, 294(b) and 506(ii) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the disputes and differences between the de facto complainant and the accused have been settled amicably at the intervention of mediators. Crl.M.A.No.6785/2009 was filed by the petitioner for receiving the affidavit filed by N. Chandran and Sulaiman Rawther, who are the aggrieved persons. In B.A. No. 6454/ 2009 2 those affidavits, it is stated that disputes have been amicably settled. 4. In these circumstances, I think the petitioners can be directed to appear before the investigating officer for taking appropriate steps in the matter. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 14/12/2009. It is assured by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the aggrieved persons also will be produced before the investigating officer by the petitioners. Post on 18/12/2009. 5. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No. 409 of 2009 of Karukachal Police Station, Kottayam. The petitioners shall produce copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the B.A. No. 6454/ 2009 3 petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners have complied with the direction contained in the order dated 8/12/2009. 3. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.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 report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. B.A. No. 6454/ 2009 4 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 to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm