IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 30TH JUNE 2008 / 9TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3886 of 2008() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO.278/2008 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION APPLICANT/ACCUSED 1 : ------------------------------------ NOUSHAD, S/O.MOIDU, NEAR IQBAL HIGH SCHOOL, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : -------------------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, REPRESENTING S.H.O. HOSDURG. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.P.A.SALIM THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.3886 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of June, 2008 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 447, 427, 379 read with Section 34 IPC. According to the prosecution, the petitioner along with 2 others trespassed into the verandah of the house of the defacto complainant and broke the window glass and stole the motorbike from near the gate of the defacto complainant's house. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this case is falsely foisted against the petitioner because of the enmity which existed between the petitioner and the defacto complainant due to a matrimonial dispute. Petitioner married the defacto complainant's sister and she was divorced thereafter. The petitioner married again thereafter. Hence, the petitioner is on enimical terms with the defacto complainant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no offence is committed by the petitioner as alleged something else transpired. On 10.05.2008, the petitioner's mother found the B.A.3886/2008 2 defacto complainant parking a motor bike by the side of the road in front of the petitioner's house. He kept the motor bike on the road and left the place. Petitioner's mother apprehended some danger and she closed the front door. But the defacto complainant did not come back even after expiry of hours. She smelt some danger and thought that some bomb blast might occur, and hence the neighbours were informed. They informed the police about the matter and the police came there and took away the bike. Thereafter a false complaint is lodged against the petitioner stating that bike was stolen by the petitioner and others. 5. This petition is opposed. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the 2nd accused was arrested and he is remanded. The 3rd accused is not identified so far. He was wearing a mask at the time of occurrence. The petitioner was absconding and he surrendered before the Court below and was remanded. 6. After hearing both sides, I have perused the case diary. It reveals that seizure of the bike was effected on 10.05.2008 from the side of the road situated in front of the house of the petitioner who is the 1st accused. The complaint in this case is also see lodged on the same day in the morning at 11 a.m., though the alleged B.A.3886/2008 3 incident occurred two days back, on 08.05.2008. It is not explained why the lodging of the complaint was delayed. As per the allegations in the complaint, a serious offence is committed. The defacto complainant was allegedly coming out of his house on the bike, carrying his daughter on the bike, where the petitioner and others came towards him for attack, and therefore he abandoned bike and went inside the house. Thereafter, the accused allegedly trespassed into the house and broke the window glass etc. Even though there was prior enmity between the two groups, it is not stated in the F.I. Statement why the delay occurred in lodging the complaint. 7. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioner who is the 1st accused in the crime. Hence the following order is passed: (i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 7 days from the date of this order and make himself available for interrogation. (ii) Thereafter, in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, if any, he shall be produced before the Magistrate Court concerned, in accordance with law. B.A.3886/2008 4 (iii) Thereupon, on filing of bail application if any, the petitioner shall be released on bail by the learned Magistrate, on executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate on the following conditions: (a) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. (b) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation The application is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac