IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2010 / 15TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6078 of 2009() --------------------------------- CRIME NO. 279/2009 OF KUMBALA POLICE STATION ...................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- 1. MUHAMMED HANEEFA, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ANTHU @ ABDULLA, R/AT.BADRIYYA MANZIL, MEEYYAPADAVU, MEENJA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. MOHINUDEEN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.ANTHU @ ABDULLA, R/AT.BADRIYYA MANZIL, MEYYAPADAVU, MEENJA VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUMBLA POLICE STATION, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/01/2010, THE COURT ON 05/01/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6078 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2010 O R D E R 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. 279/2009 of Kumbala Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 498 A , 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The first accused is the husband of the de facto complainant. The second accused is the brother of the first accused. The marriage between the first accused and the de facto complainant took place on 18.05.2000. The allegation is that the wife of the first accused was being illtreated by the accused demanding more dowry. It is also alleged that the first accused had once thrown away the child causing serious injuries to him. It is submitted that even now the child is suffering from the consequences of the injuries sustained. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail to the first accused. However, the position of the second accused is B.A. No. 6078 of 2009 2 different. The facts and circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the second petitioner(second accused). There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the second petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The second petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The second petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The second petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The second petitioner 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. B.A. No. 6078 of 2009 3 The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to the first accused/first petitioner and it is allowed in so far as it relates to the second petitioner/second accused to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln