IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1106 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.132/08 OF KASARAGOD POLICE STATION : PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED --------------------------------------- T.DAMODARAN MUNNAD, AGED 51/08, S/O. MALINGA MANIYANI, JAYAPURAM HOUSE, P.O.MUNNAD, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER RESPONDENTS: STATE ------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.1106 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces allegations under the Indian Arms Act. He is the 2nd accused. The crux of the allegations is that in the vehicle driven by the 2nd accused/the petitioner, the 1st accused was a passenger. He had in his possession an unlicenced country gun. When the police party was about to intercept, the petitioner allegedly took to his heels and could not be apprehended. The incident took place on 10.02.08. The passenger, the 1st accused was arrested on the same day. The petitioner has not been arrested so far. He apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has absolutely no contumacious responsibility for the arm which was allegedly in the possession of the 1st accused. The mere alleged fact that the petitioner had run away on seeing the police party is no reason to lightly assume that the petitioner has contumacious responsibility for the possession of the arm in question by the 1st accused. In any view of the matter, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigators, it is prayed. B.A.No.1106 of 2008 2 3. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor . The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application for anticipatory bail. The learned Public Prosecutor points out that as against the petitioner, only two allegations are there. First is that the contraband arm was found with A1 who was inside the jeep driven by the petitioner. Secondly the petitioner had run away on seeing the police party. These may not be reckoned as sufficient reasons to justify the arrest and detention of the petitioner. The fear of the police is rampant and a person who merely ran away from the police to avoid any interaction with the police cannot lightly to be assumed to have any contumacious responsibility, it is submitted. 4. I shall carefully avoid any detailed discussion on merits about the acceptability of the allegations or the credibility of the data collected. I take note of the nature of the allegations raised against the petitioner. I take note of the fact that the learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application for anticipatory bail. I am satisfied that subject to appropriate conditions which shall ensure the expeditious completion of the investigation, anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 5. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The B.A.No.1106 of 2008 3 following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 04.03.2008. He shall be enlarged on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) 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 05.03.2008 and thereafter 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 thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 05.03.08 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 05.03.08. B.A.No.1106 of 2008 4 (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-