IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 8213 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.85/10 OF RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) ..... APPLICANT/ACCUSED NO.2: ----------------------------------------------- ANOOP MATHEW, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW, THANIMOLAKARA KUDIYIL (H), P.P.ROAD, NEAR S.N.D.P.MANDIRAM, VENGOLA P.O. BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, BY ADV. SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN, SRI.REVIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE, RAMAMANGALAM POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. RAMKUMAR, J. =================== B.A. No. 8213 of 2010 ==================== Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010. ORDER Petitioner who is the 2nd accused in Crime No. 85 of 2010 of Ramamangalam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 5 and 6 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 read with Section 34 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (Crl.Appeal No. 2271 of 2010), I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioner. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to B.A.No.8213 /2010 -:2:- have his application for bail allowed by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 30.12.2010 or on 31.12.2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the investigating officer is of the view that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the petitioner is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest in the case diary as insisted in paragraph 129 of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre's case (supra). The petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the interrogation of the petitioner is without arresting him, the petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that the petitioner has been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, release the petitioner on bail. 4. In case the accused while surrendering before the Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the B.A.No.8213 /2010 -:3:- interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was not available after the production or appearance of the accused . 5. The release of the petitioner shall be on the petitioner executing a bond for `15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and subject to the following conditions:- 1. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays. 2. The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. 3. Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution. B.A.No.8213 /2010 -:4:- 4. Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. 5. If the petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled. This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv