IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2010 / 28TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7501 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.504/2009 OF AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. RATHEESH, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT MALIYACKAL VELIYIL, CHANDIROOR P.O. 2. RENJITH, S/O.NATESAN, AGED 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT PUTHEN NIKARTHIL, CHANDIROOR P.O. 3. BINU @ VINUKUTTAN, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 21 YEARS, NIKARTHIL HOUSE, CHANDIROOR P.O. 4. VINOD, S/O.BABU, AGED 23 YEARS, MOORTHICKAL, CHANDIROOR P.O. 5. ANEESH, S/O.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 24 YEARS, MALIYACKAL HOUSE, CHANDIROOR P.O. 6. PRAJEESH, S/O.PAVITHRAN, AGED 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANIYANVELIYIL, CHANDIROOR P.O. 7. SHYJU, S/O.SUKUMARAN, AGED 32 YEARS, ELAVANKALCHIRA, CHANDIROOR P.O. 8. BINU, S/O.VINCENT, AGED 23 YEARS, ALUMKAL VELIYIL, CHANDIROOR P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AROOR POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO.504/2009 OF AROOR POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7501 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners have filed this Bail Application as if they are the accused persons in Crime No.504 of 2009 of Aroor Police Station, Alappuzha District. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners 1 and 4 are not accused in the case and petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 are respectively accused Nos.2, 1, 5, 6, 7 and 3. 3. The offences alleged against the accused persons are under Sections 323, 324 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 7.1.2010, 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 BA No.7501/2009 2 officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 11th and 12th January, 2010. The petitioners shall produce copy of this order before the investigating officer. Post on 15th January, 2010. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.504 of 2009 of Aroor Police Station, Alappuzha District.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction contained in the order dated 7.1.2010 has been complied with by the accused persons. 6. 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 7.1.2010 has been complied with by the accused persons, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8, the officer in charge of the police BA No.7501/2009 3 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: a) Petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 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) Petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) Petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) Petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 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 in so far as it relates to petitioners 2, 3 and 5 to 8 and it is dismissed as unnecessary in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 4. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl