IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8715 of 2011() ----------------------------- IN CRIME NO.402/2009 OF MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER(S): /ACCUSED NO.7: -------------------------------------------- NOUSHAD MATRA, S/O.MOHAMMED KUTTY, MATERAN HOUSE, P.O.KOORIYAD, VENGARA AMSOM TIRURANGADI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MALAPPURAM POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.K. RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/11/2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DS K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.8715 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.7 in Crime No.402 of 2009 of Malappuram Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 341, 427, 506(ii) and 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 16th November, 2011, the following order was passed: “3. The prosecution case is that on 15/09/2009 at 9 A.M., while the de facto complainant was travelling in a car along with Malappuram-Kottakkal Road, accused Nos.1 to 9 intercepted the car and damaged the windshield glass of the car and robbed a sum of Rupees Forty lakhs kept in the car. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted with reference to the averments in the bail application that the allegation in the F.I.R. lodged in 2009 is that three identifiable persons blocked the car, in B.A.No.8715 OF 2011 2 which the de facto complainant was travelling, broken the glass of the car causing a damage of Rs.4,000/-. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the cousin brother of the de facto complainant furnished information for registering Crime No.369 of 2011 of Thirurangadi Police Station, it was disclosed that the statement made in the F.I. Statement in Crime No.402 of 2009 of Malappuram Police Station was not fully correct and that the accused persons seven in number after intercepting the car, robbed Rupees Forty lakhs. It is submitted that on the basis of that statement, the petitioners are also implicated in the case in 2011 and they apprehend arrest. 5. The de facto complainant had no case when he reported the matter before the police that a sum of Rupees Forty lakhs was forcibly taken away by the accused persons. His only case was that three persons intercepted the car and damaged the vehicle. 6. Taking into account the peculiar 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 21 st and 22 nd November, 2011. 7. Post on 28/11/2011. 8. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.402 of 2009 of Malappuram Police Station, till 30/11/2011. 9. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. B.A.No.8715 OF 2011 3 The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the direction in the order dated 16th November, 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 fact that the direction in the order dated16th November, 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 every Monday, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and B.A.No.8715 OF 2011 4 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. e) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation. 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. cms