IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7408 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.891/2009 OF NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 AND 3 ----------------------------------------------- 1. SURESH KUMAR,S/O.MURUKESAN, SURESH BHAVAN,VADAKODE,PERUMPAZHATHOOR.PO, NEYYATTINKARA. 2. SANTHOSH KUMAR,S/O.JAGADHARAN, CHEMMANNUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,VADAKODE, PERUMPAZHATHOOR.P.O, NEYYATTINKARA. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANTS --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.7408 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009 ORDER Suresh Kumar and Santhosh Kumar, accused Nos.1 and 3 respectively in Crime No.891 of 2009 of Neyyattinkara Police Station, have filed this application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294(b), 332 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 23.11.2009, accused No.1 was travelling in a KSRTC bus. When the first accused was asked to take the tickets, he attacked the conductor, the de facto complainant. It is also alleged that the other accused came on a motor bike and attacked the bus conductor. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the first petitioner (first accused). However, since the case in respect of the second petitioner BA No.7408/2009 2 (accused No.3) stands on a different footing, I think anticipatory bail can be granted to the second petitioner. 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. The Bail Application is dismissed in so far as it relates to the first petitioner/first accused and it is allowed in the manner indicated above in so far as it relates to the second petitioner/third accused. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl