IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 26TH OCTOBER 2009 / 4TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5173 of 2009 CRIME NO.212 OF 2009 OF VALLIKUNNAM POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA APPLICANTS/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- 1. MANOJ, S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN MANOJ BHAVANAM, VALIAKUZHI MURI, CHEPPADU, ALAPPUZHA. 2. RADHAKRISHNAN, MANOJ BHAVANAM, VALIAKUZHI MURI, CHEPPADU, ALAPUZHA. 3. MANI, MONOJ BHAVANAM, VALIAKUZHI MURI, CHEPPADU ALAPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 5173 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of October, 2009 O R D E R Apprehending arrest in Crime No.212 of 2009 of Vallikunnam Police Station, Alappuzha District, the petitioners have filed this application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The de facto complainant filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kayamkulam, which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was registered. Though the crime was registered under various Sections including Sections 308 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, it is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that, after deleting all other Sections, the remaining Section of offence alleged against the accused person is under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. So also, petitioners 2 and 3 were deleted from the array of accused. The first petitioner is the sole accused in the case. B.A. NO. 5173 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 3. In the aforesaid circumstances, the Bail Application has become unnecessary in so far as it relates to petitioners 2 and 3. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. 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 first petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the first petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The first petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The first petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The first petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; B.A. NO. 5173 OF 2009 :: 3 :: d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is dismissed as unnecessary in so far as it relates to petitioners 2 and 3 and it is allowed to the extent indicated above in favour of the first petitioner. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/