IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6394 of 2009 CRIME NO.276 OF 2009 OF IDUKKI POLICE STATION, IDUKKI PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ DEVIKANTH KARUPULLI KALARIKAL, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.BINU PAUL RESPONDENTS: STATE & COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IDUKKI. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 6394 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.276 of 2009 of Idukki Police Station, Idukki District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are under Sections 323, 324, 308 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 2.11.2009, the following order was passed: “The petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.276 of 2009 of Idukki Police Station. He apprehends arrest by the police and therefore this application for Anticipatory Bail is filed. The petitioner is a student of Engineering College, Painav. It is submitted that the disputes between the accused persons and the defacto complainant and Riyas have been settled amicably. B.A. NO. 6394 OF 2009 :: 2 :: The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to appear before the Investigating Officer, so that it can be ascertained whether the matter is settled. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 08.11.2009 and if necessary on another Sunday as the investigating officer may direct. The investigating officer would make every effort to see that the defacto complainant and the other injured also appear, so that the matter can be effectively settled. Post after two weeks. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner will not be arrested till then. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 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 2.11.2009 has been complied with by the petitioner. It is submitted that one of the injured persons also had appeared before the police station and as between the petitioner and that person, the matter was settled. However, the de facto complainant and the other injured did not appear before the investigating officer. B.A. NO. 6394 OF 2009 :: 3 :: 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 dated 2.11.2009 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 Rs.10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) 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 ahz/