IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2011 / 29TH ASWINA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8188 of 2011 CRIME NO.1570 OF 2011 OF THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- SURESH.K.S., AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, KUNNILAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANAKKAPADI P.O., KARIMALOOR (VIA), ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.K.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 8188 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 21st day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.1570 of 2011 of Thrissur Town East Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 405 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation is that accused Nos.1 and 2 went to the jewellery of the de facto complainant and received 345.22 gms. of gold, but the accused did not make the payment. The case of the petitioner is that he is a taxi driver and the first accused used to hire his taxi for going to various places. According to the petitioner, he is not answerable to any claim for money. 4. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 11th October, 2011, the following order was passed: Bail Appl. NO.8188 of 2011 :: 2 :: “4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 17th and 18th October, 2011. 5. Post on 21st October, 2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.1570 of 2011 of Thrissur Town East Police Station, till 25th October, 2011. 7. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the direction in the order dated 11th October, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. Bail Appl. NO.8188 of 2011 :: 3 :: 6. 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 11th October, 2011 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 `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) 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/