IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8953 of 2011() ----------------------------------------- CRIME NO.662/2011 OF KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ 1. SAFARULLAH, AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.MUSTAFA, PALLIPADINJATEYIL, KUREEPUZHA, KAVANAD, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. SHAHANSHA, AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.JAHANGHIR, AMANIYA MANZHIL, MEDAYIL JUNCTION, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S. HYMA. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs P.S.GOPINATHAN, J ---------------------------- B.A. NO.8953 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2011. O R D E R Petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.662/2011 of Kollam West Police Station for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 307 r/w Section 149 IPC. Apprehending, arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Investigating Officer, this petition was filed seeking an order directing the respondent to release the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest with a plea that they are innocent of the allegations. 2. The first petitioner moved a similar petition before the Sessions Judge, Kollam, which was dismissed by Annexure A1 order. Now, this petition. Having heard either side, I find that the petitioners being members of the unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, committed the crime. In the above circumstance, I find that this is not a fit case to invoke jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, taking note that the second petitioner is aged only 19 years, I find that it would be appropriate to release him on stringent condition. 3. In the result, this petition as far as the first petitioner is concerned is dismissed with direction to the first petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer. 4. The petition as far as the second petitioner is concerned is B.A. NO.8953 OF 2011 2 disposed of with direction to appear before the Investigating Officer, who after interrogation and recovery, if any, shall release the second petitioner on bail on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions :- 1. The second petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer at 10.00 AM on alternate days. 2. He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. 3. He shall not leave Kollam District without the previous permission of the Investigating Officer. 4. This order shall be in force for a period of one month, within which period the second petitioner shall apply for regular bail, failing which the Investigating Officer shall arrest the second petitioner and produce him before the Magistrate concerned. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE amk