IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 206 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.210/07 OF KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER: ----------------- SANDEEP JOSE, S/O.JOSE, AGED 21 YEARS, MANIKATHUKUNNEL HOUSE, NELLIKKUTTY P.O., CHEMBERI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUDIYANMALA POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY P.P. SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 206 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Secs.326 and 308 of the IPC. The de facto complainant was allegedly travelling on his motor-cycle on 18/12/07. He was involved in an incident in which he was thrown off from his motor-cycle and suffered injuries including a fracture. Two autorikshaws were allegedly involved in the incident. According to the de facto complainant, he is a political activist. While he was proceeding on his two wheeler, one autorikshaw tried to hit him. He tried to save himself by swerving to the side. At that point of time, another autorikshaw came from behind and hit him and he fell down and suffered injuries. The de facto complainant alleged that there was a deliberate ploy to do B.A. No. 206 OF 2008 -: 2 :- away with him on account of political animosity. The name of the driver of one of the authorikshaws is given in the First Information Statement. The petitioner is said to be such driver. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He has absolutely no political animosity against the de facto complainant. He was not driving either of the two vehicles. Even assuming that he was the driver of the vehicle, there is absolutely no indication to suggest that it was a deliberate and wilful attack on the injured. At worst, the allegations reveal only a road traffic accident and no elements of any deliberate attempt to harm the de facto complainant can be spelled out from the materials available. In these circumstances, it is prayed that the petitioner may be saved of the trauma of arrest and incarceration. Either to improve his stakes in politics or on account of baseless suspicion such allegations are being raised by the de facto complainant, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Notice was given. The learned Public Prosecutor was B.A. No. 206 OF 2008 -: 3 :- requested to specifically point out any circumstances which can indicate any deliberate attempt to harm the petitioner on account of any reasons. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that at the moment, the Investigators have not been able to identify any circumstances to suggest that there was any deliberate attempt to harm the de facto complainant. The Case Diary has been placed before me. I have perused the Case Diary. I am satisfied that this is a fit case where the discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. can be invoked in favour of the petitioner and appropriate directions issued. In coming to this conclusion, I take note of the particular fact that no specific political animosity is at all alleged against the petitioner herein. There is nothing to indicate the probability of the petitioner wanting to do any harm against the de facto complainant. Subject to appropriate conditions which shall ensure the interests of a fair, efficient and expeditious investigation anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. In the absence of opposition from the learned Public Prosecutor, it is not necessary for me to advert to the facts in any greater detail in this order. B.A. No. 206 OF 2008 -: 4 :- 4. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C: (i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 24/1/08. He shall be released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 25/1/08 and 28/1/08. During this period the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month. Subsequently, he shall so make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall B.A. No. 206 OF 2008 -: 5 :- thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if these directions were not issued at all; (iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 24/1/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 24/1/08. (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/