IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5651 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.603/2008 OF KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3: -------------------------- JITHESH, S/O.A.K.KRISHNAN, RESIDING AT ASARIPPARAMBIL, AYMANAM P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ SRI.BIJU SUKUMARAN SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM EAST POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER), KOTTAYAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5651 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.603 of 2008 of Kottayam East Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 18/07/2011, the following order was passed: “3. The prosecution case is that, in 2006 the accused persons forged and fabricated a power of attorney of the de facto complainant in the name of the first accused and got it registered. The further allegation is that using that power of attorney accused No.1 executed a sale deed in respect of the property. The allegation against the petitioner (accused No.3) is that he is a witness to the power of attorney. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the order in Bail Appln.No.4964 of 2011, the first accused surrendered before the Police, his arrest was recorded and he was granted bail by the Magistrate. Bail Appln.No.5651/2011 : 2 : 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 23/07/2011 and 24/07/2011. 5. Post on 28/07/2011. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.603 of 2008 of Kottayam East Police Station, till 01/08/2011.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 18/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 18/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand Bail Appln.No.5651/2011 : 3 : only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. d) The 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 allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj