IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3455 of 2009 CRIME NO.390 OF 2009 OF VADAKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED 1 TO 6 --------------------------------------------- 1. THEYYATHAM KANDI ANEESH, S/O.POKKAN, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM, DESOM. 2. MALOL RAMESH, S/O.RAGHAVAN, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM & DESOM. 3. PARAKKETTIL KAREEM, S/O.ERMULLAN, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM & DESOM. 4. KUVVANI VAYAL KABEER, S/O.AMMD, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM & DESOM. 5. KALANGODATHIL AZEEZ, S/O.KUNHAVULLA HAJI, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM & DESOM. 6. THACHOLI PRAMOD, S/O.ONAKKAN, THIRUVALLUR AMSOM & DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE, REPRESENTED BY S.I OF POLICE, VATAKARA POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3455 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 6 in Crime No.390 of 2009 of Vadakara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 7.9.2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that a direction is to be issued to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 16.9.2009 and 17.9.2009 at 9 A.M. Post on 22.9.2009. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested till then.” B.A. NO. 3455 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6 have complied with the direction while petitioners 1 and 4 have not appeared before the investigating officer as directed. 5. Since the direction to appear before the investigating officer was not complied with by petitioners 1 and 4, this Bail Application in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 4 is dismissed. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances and also considering that the order dated 7.9.2009 has been complied with by petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: B.A. NO. 3455 OF 2009 :: 3 :: a) Petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) Petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) Petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6 shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed in favour of petitioners 2, 3, 5 and 6 and dismissed in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 4. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/