IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3399 of 2009 CRIME NO.139 OF 2008 OF KARUNAGAPALLY POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.1: ------------------------------ PUSHPAVALLI, W/O.BHASKARAN, AGED 67 YEARS, BHASKARA BHAVAN, KALLELLIL BHAGAM VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.A.AHZAR RESPONDENTS: STATE -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, KARUNAGAPPALLY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3399 OF 2009 D ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th June, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.139 of 2008 of Karunagapally Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 3(1) of the Explosive Substance Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 9.2.2008, an explosion took place in the shed attached to the house of the petitioner where explosive substances were stored. Admittedly, the first accused had the licence to store explosive substances. The allegation is that the first accused and her husband were engaged in manufacture of crackers in the shed. The prosecution alleges that the first accused did not have the licence for the manufacture of explosives. The petitioner apprehends arrest. It is submitted that if the petitioner is arrested and detained, she would be put to great hardship. Apart from the loss sustained by her by the explosion, if she is put in jail, it would be another disadvantage to her family, submits the counsel for the petitioner. B.A. NO. 3399 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and the allegations levelled against 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 her on bail on her executing bond for Rs.25,000/- 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 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 ahz/