IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2011 / 5TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5307 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.518/2011 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PETITIONERS :ACCUSED ---------------------- 1. BIJU,AGED 41YEARS, S/O.UNNI,KADAVANKASSERY HOUSE, NEAR CHERAI DISPENSARY, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. LEELA, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.UNNI, KADAVANKASSERY HOUSE, NEAR CHERAI DISPENSARY, PALLIPURAM VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD SRI.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5307 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of July, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.518 of 2011 of Munambam Police Station, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498A, 406 and 326 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 15/07/2011, the following order was passed: “3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. It is pointed out that the grievous hurt allegedly caused to the defacto complainant was before three years ago. 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 petitioners should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 21st and 22nd July, 2011. 5. Post on 27th July, 2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.518 of 2011 of the Munambam Police Station, till 27th July, 2011”. Bail Appln.No.5307/2011 : 2 : 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 15/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioners. 5. 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 15/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their 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 first petitioner (A1) shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; Bail Appln.No.5307/2011 : 3 : c) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. e) 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 skj