IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 19TH OCTOBER 2009 / 27TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5940 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.453/09 OF NOORANADU POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------------ SAMUEL, AGED 54 YEARS, JIJO BHAVANAM, VETTIYAR MURI, VETTIYAR VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5940 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of October, 2009 ORDER This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.453 of 2009 of Nooranadu Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 279, 338 and 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 134(a) and (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 3. The prosecution case is that the accused drove a tipper lorry on 9.9.2009 at 3.35 P.M., in contravention of the order passed by the authorities not to ply tipper lorries between 3.30 P.M. and 4.30 P.M. and hit against four students. Three of the students succumbed to the injuries. The petitioner was arrested on 11.9.2009 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. The Bail Application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. It is submitted that the petitioner drove the vehicle disregarding prohibition of plying tipper lorries between 3.30 P.M. and 4.30 P.M. The restriction was imposed taking into BA No.5940/2009 2 account the safety of the students and the general public. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was a deep pit in the road and the accident occurred while the lorry was taken to divert from the pit. It is submitted that the scene mahazar would indicate that such a pit was in existence. It is submitted that, later, that sentence is seen scored off. It is also stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no reason why the petitioner should be detained in custody further as the investigation is at the final stage. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Mavelikara, subject to the following conditions: BA No.5940/2009 3 a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on every Monday and Thursday, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not enter into the limits of the Nooranadu Police Station for a period of two months except for complying with conditions (a) and (b). d) The petitioner shall surrender his driving license before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Mavelikara, if the driving license is not already in the custody of the police. e) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; f) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; g) 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 csl