IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3838 of 2010() ---------------------------------- PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED : -------------------------------- ABDULLA.M., S/O.M.HASSAINAR HAJI, AGED 55 YEARS, MAINADI HOUSE, P.O.PAIDI, ADHUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE : ------------------------------------------------ 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADHUR POLICE STATION, ADHUR, KASARGOD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. K.S.SIVAKUMAR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3838 of 2010 ----------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner along with 4 others in furtherance of common intention, committed theft of a tree standing in the property of the Panchayat on 03.06.2010. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner that petitioner is a timber merchant and he had purchased timber from one Romanna Gowda, who is residing in Karnataka. Petitioner was informed by him that the tree stood in his property and it belonged to the said Gowda. Petitioner only caused the tree to be cut without any intention to commit theft. Learned counsel for petitioner had requested for an opportunity to explain his innocence to the investigating officer and this Court directed him to report before the Investigating Officer and, accordingly, he reported and he was questioned by the police. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner reported before the investigating officer as directed by this court B.A. No. 3838 / 2010 2 and he was interrogated. His custodial interrogation is not necessary. Hence, he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to petitioner. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: 1. Petitioner shall, in the event of arrest, be released on bail on his executing 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 arresting officer on the following conditions: i). He shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with the investigation. ii). He shall not influence or intimidate any witness or tamper with evidence. 2. This order will be in force only for a period of 20 days. In the meantime, he shall seek regular bail from the court concerned, whether he is arrested or not. Petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE Krs