IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8225 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1631/2011 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED : ---------------------- EENOS NELSON, THONIIKADAVU HOUSE, OLATHANI, NEYYATTINKARA P.O. BY ADV. SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL SRI.K.NIRMALAN RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.8225 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1631 of 2011 of Neyyattinkara Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 5 of Explosive Substances Act. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 15/11/2011, the following order was passed: “3. The prosecution case is that on 28/09/2011 at 3.15 P.M., when the Sub Inspector of Police and party reached Kakkanom Junction, they got reliable information that explosive substances were stored by the petitioner in a house. They reached the spot at 3.30 P.M. At that time, the accused who was available in the house ran away. The care taker of the house was available there. On search, a quantity of 61 Kgs. of ammonium nitrate was found stored in the house. The prosecution case is that the Bail Appln.No.8225/2011 : 2 : petitioner was in possession of the house. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Crime No.1629 of 2011 was registered under the provisions of the Kerala Mines and Minerals Act and Rules and the Explosives Act on the allegation that in the quarry run by the petitioner, illegal blasting operations were being carried out using jackhammer. The counsel pointed out that the quarry is at a distance of about 2 Kms. from the house referred to in Crime No.1631 of 2011, as is evidenced from the F.I.Rs. in Crime Nos.1631 of 2011 and 1629 of 2011. The counsel further submitted that the F.I.R. in Crime No.1629 of 2011 shows that the very same police officers reached near the quarry at 3.10 P.M. prepared a mahazar, seized a vehicle, arrested a person and completed the proceedings. The very same police officers searched the house involved in Crime No.1631 of 2011 at 3.30 P.M. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is practically impossible. 5. While dealing with this bail application, it is not necessary to decide the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner as mentioned above. Bail Appln.No.8225/2011 : 3 : 6. However, in 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 petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 20/11/2011 and 21/11/2011. 7. Post on 25/11/2011. 8. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.1631 of 2011 of Neyyattinkara Police Station, till 28/11/2011. 9. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 15/11/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the Bail Appln.No.8225/2011 : 4 : fact that the direction in the order dated 15/11/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:- a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. Bail Appln.No.8225/2011 : 5 : 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 skj True copy P.A. to Judge