IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2315 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.62/2009 OF ERUMELY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. SALI, W/O.SUNNY, MUTTAPPALLIYIL HOUSE, MUKKOTTUTHARA, ERUMELY, KOTTAYAM. 2. SUNNY, MUTTAPPALLIYIL HOUSE, MUKKOOTTUTHARA, ERUMELY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERUMELY POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BENNY VARGHESE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = B.A.No.2315 of 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28 th day of May, 2009 ORDER In this petition filed under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioners who are accused Nos.4 and 5 in Crime No.62 of 2009 of Erumely Police Station for offences punishable under Secs.451,354 and 498A read with Sec.34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail. 2. At an earlier occasion, the petitioners had filed B.A.No.1167 of 2009 seeking anticipatory bail in the very same crime. As per Annexure 1 order dated 13.03.2009, this Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners for a period of one month in the event of their arrest in connection with the above crime. According to the petitioners, they have not been arrested by the police so far. If so, Annexure 1 order has come into operation. While accused Nos.1 to 3 were arrested, the petitioners were not arrested by the Police in connection with the above crime. Pursuant to Annexure 1 order, the petitioners herein along with A1 to A3 surrendered before the J.F.C.M-II, B.A.No. 2315 of 2009 2 Kanjirappally on 24.3.09 and applied for regular bail. 3. It was unnecessary for the petitioners to surrender before the learned Magistrate along with accused Nos. 1 to 3 and seek regular bail in obedience to Annexure 1 order. Since Annexure 1 bail order has not commenced its operation as against the petitioners who have not been arrested so far, the period of one month fixed thereunder has no application for the petitioners. Hence the petitioners are free to apply for regular bail before the learned Magistrate and the Magistrate will have to consider their application on merits uninfluenced by Annexure A1 order for anticipatory bail. The position is clarified as above. Dated this the 28 th day of May, 2009. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj