IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2010 / 2ND MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 345 of 2010 SC.614/2007 OF ADDL. DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC-III), KASARAGODE PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- SANTHOSH, AGED 29 YEARS S/O.ACHAMA @ ANNAMMA, KARINDALAM VILLAGE KASARGODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE RESPONDENT: STATE: --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 345 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in SC No.614 of 2007, on the file of the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ad-Hoc III), Kasaragod. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 376 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted the following: During the committal proceedings, bail was granted to the petitioner. After committal to the Court of Sessions, the petitioner was directed to appear on 4.1.2008. The petitioner appeared before the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ad-Hoc III), Kasaragod on 4.1.2008. The sureties were also present. However, the Sessions Judge was on leave. The case was adjourned to 28.3.2008. On that day also, the Sessions Judge was on leave. Later, the case was adjourned to 25.6.2008, 18.9.2008, 9.12.2008, B.A. NO.345 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 17.2.2009, 7.5.2009 and 19.6.2009. It is stated that on all these dates there was no sitting in Court. On 25.6.2008, the petitioner was present with his sureties. It is stated that on 19.6.2009, the case was adjourned to 28.7.2009. On that day, the petitioner was absent. Application was filed to condone his absence. That application was allowed and the case was adjourned to 28.8.2009. On that day also, the petitioner was absent. He filed an application to condone his absence on the ground that he was laid up as a result of a motor accident. The application to condone his absence was dismissed and non-bailable warrant was issued. The petitioner surrendered before Court on 10.12.2009. The learned Sessions Judge remanded him to judicial custody after dismissing his application for bail. It is submitted that another application was filed for bail, which was also dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge on 24.12.2009. 4. I do not think that continued detention of the petitioner is necessary in the case. If the petitioner is released on bail, that would not affect the trial of the case. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner undertakes to appear before Court on all the posting dates without fail, unless he is prevented by reasons beyond his control to appear before Court. B.A. NO.345 OF 2010 :: 3 :: 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner. 6. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Ad- Hoc III), Kasaragod, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before Court on all the posting dates without fail, unless he is prevented by reasons beyond his control to appear before Court; 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 as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/