IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2010 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1050 of 2010 CRIME NO.179 OF 2010 OF PUNALUR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------- 1. SUJIRAJ @ ITTU, S/O.LALITHA, MATHRA, P.O.KARAVALOOR, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. LALITHA, M/O.SUJIRAJ, MATHRA, P.O.KARAVALOOR, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. (CRIME NO.179/2010 OF PULANUR POLICE STATION). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 1050 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 12th day of March, 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.179 of 2010 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 452, 506(ii) and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 1.3.2010, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 AM on 6th March, 2010. B.A. NO. 1050 OF 2010 :: 2 :: Post on 12.3.2010. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.179 of 2010 of Punalur Police Station, Kollam. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 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 1.3.2010 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 1.3.2010 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 Rs.15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: B.A. NO. 1050 OF 2010 :: 3 :: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners 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/