IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8510 of 2011() ---------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN BA.55/2011 Dated 12/01/2011 CRIME NO.464/2010 OF PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------- K.P.SHAJU, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.APPUKUTTAN, KANNAMPURATH HOUSE, ARIYALLUR P.O.,MALAPPURAM DIST, KERALA STATE BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): STATE ----------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.(CRIME NO.464/2010 OF PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.REJI JOSEPH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs P.S.GOPINATHAN, J ---------------------------- B.A. NO. 8510 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011. O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.464/2010 of Parappanangadi Police Station for offences under Sections 464, 465, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 12(1)(b) of Indian Passport Act. Though he is on bail, he would apprehend arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Investigating Officer. With that plea, this petition is filed, seeking an order directing the respondent to release the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest. In the light of the allegation, the Investigating Officer was directed to appear. 2. The Investigating Officer is reported to be on Special duty at Sabarimala. The Sub Inspector of Police, Parappanangadi, who is in charge is present. It is submitted that the petitioner was arrested in another case. Formal arrest was thereafter made in this case. But he was released from jail without executing a bail bond in this case, though on executing bail bond in connected four other cases. Since, the petitioner had not executed bail bond and that further interrogation of the petitioner is warranted in this case, the Investigating Officer went in search of the petitioner and that there is illegality in arresting the petitioner. The submission is recorded. 3. Having heard either side, I find that an earlier application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed. In that petition, it was reported by the Additional Director General of Prosecution that the petitioner was arrested in Crime No.70/2010 and arrest was formally recorded in this case also. B.A. NO. 8510 OF 2011 2 When the petitioner filed Bail Application No.55/2011 for regular bail, that petition was dismissed for the reason that the investigation was not completed and the witnesses had to be questioned. Though, no bail was granted, without executing a bail bond, the petitioner managed to get released from the custody. Therefore, it could not be said that the petitioner is on bail. In the above circumstance, I find that the petitioner has to apply for regular bail. Before that, the petitioner is necessarily to be interrogated. Such being the facts of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer on 11-12-2011. The Investigating Officer, after interrogation shall, release him on bail after executing a bond for Rs.20,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions :- 1. Petitioner shall report before the investigating Officer as and when required. 2. Petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 3. Petitioner shall not leave Malappuram District without previous permission. 4. This order shall be in force for a period of one month, within which period the petitioners shall apply for regular bail, failing which the Investigating Officer shall arrest the petitioner and produce them before the Magistrate concerned. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE amk