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. 9322 of 2011() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.983/2011 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION. .......... APPLICANT -------------------- R.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O.RAGHAVA KURUP, AGED 61 YEARS, KARAKKAD RAJ BHAVAN, ALA. P.O., CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE ---------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. REJI JOSEPH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ---------------------------- B.A.No.9322 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. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 983/2011 of Chengannur Police Station for offences punishable under Section 120B, 457 and 380 read with 34 I.P.C. The case was registered in relation to a theft of Thazhikakudam of Chengannur Sri Kumaramangalam Subramannya Swami Temple. 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 petitioner on bail in the event of arrest with a plea that he is innocent of the allegations. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that though the stolen Thazhikakudm was found out from a nearby compound in an abandoned condition and that the investigation is in midway and the investigating officer does suspect the involvement of the petitioner and that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is warranted. B.A.No.9322/2011 2 3. Having heard either side, I am not in a position to rule down the request of the investigating officer for custodial interrogation as an empty formality. 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. 4. In the result, this petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer, after interrogation and recovery, if any, shall produce the petitioner before the Magistrate concerned, so as to enable him to apply for regular bail, which the Magistrate shall dispose of on merits, as far as possible, on the same day, provided due notice is given to the Assistant Public Prosecutor. (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) ps/25/11