IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1320 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CC.644/2007 of J.M.F.C.,TALIPARAMBA CRIME NO. 598/2006 OF THALIPARAMBU POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 2 : ------------------------------------ 1. SAJI JOSE, AGED 36 YEARS, KAVUMPURATH HOUSE, KARAKKAMOOLA PO, PERUNNANNOOR AMSOM, KARADUKUNNU, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANADU DISTRICT. 2. SALI JOSE, AGED 32 YEARS, W/O.SAJI JOSE, KAVUMPURATH HOUSE, KARAKKAMOOLA PO, PERUNNANNOOR AMSOM,KARADUKUNNU, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANADU DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ELDHO PAUL RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS : --------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, THALIPARAMBU POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1320 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 09th 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.598/2006 of Thaliparambu Police Station, which was pending as C.C. No.644/2007 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thaliparamba. It is submitted that the case was transferred to long pending register and it is now pending as L.P.No. 26/2010. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 420, 467 and 120 B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Non bailable warrant was issued by the Court against the petitioners. The petitioners apprehend arrest. Hence, they have filed this Bail Application. 2. It is stated that from 2007 onwards the first petitioner was under treatment in the Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Medical Sciences, Whitefield, Bangalore. It is stated that the first petitioner is continuing his treatment even after discharge from the hospital at Bangalore. B.A. No. 1320 of 2010 2 3. The first petitioner relies on Annexure A3 certificate dated 21.01.2008 issued by the Consultant Surgeon, District Hospital, Mananthavady, which shows that the first petitioner is unable to walk. It is further stated that the second petitioner is the wife of the first petitioner and she was all throughout with the first petitioner, attending to his needs. The petitioners stated that in these circumstances, they could not appear before the Court. 4. It is submitted that if the petitioners are arrested and detained, they would be put to irreparable injury and great hardship. It is also submitted that if the petitioners appear before the learned Magistrate, it is likely that they may be remanded to judicial custody. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the first petitioner cannot move at all without the help of others and that even if he is to appear before the Court, he can move about only with the help of two others. 6. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that some indulgence in favour of the petitioners is required. Accordingly, the Bail Application is disposed of as follows: B.A. No. 1320 of 2010 3 a). The second petitioner shall appear before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thaliparamba within two weeks. On such appearance, the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thaliparamba shall release the second petitioner on bail on such conditions as may be deemed fit and proper by the Learned Magistrate. b) If the first petitioner files an application within two weeks before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thaliparamba for permission to appear through counsel, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same after taking into account the physical condition of the first petitioner in such manner as the learned Magistrate thinks fit. c) If the learned Magistrate thinks that personal appearance of the first petitioner is necessary, appropriate directions can be issued. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln