IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2007 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1928 Bail Appl..No. 880 of 2007() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 63/2007 OF KONNI POLICE STATION : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. BINESH C., S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, (ASSISTANT MANAGER, HDFC, KOTTAYAM BRANCH) RESIDING AT: SHASTRI ROAD CHANDRA BHAVAN, KADAKKAD NORTH, PANDALAM. 2. PRASANTH, COLLECTION CO-ORDINATOR, HDFC BANK, ILAMPALLIL BUILDING, RAMANCHIRA, THIRUVALLA BRANCH. BY ADV. SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL SRI.M.A.JOSEPH MANAVALAN RESPONDENTS: STATE: ------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONNI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR P.N. SUKUMARAN THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/03/2007, ALONG WITH BA NO. 916 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- Bail Application Nos. 880/2007 & 916/2007 ----------------------------- Dated this 15th day of March, 2007 O R D E R The petitioners seek anticipatory bail on the allegation that Konni Police are at their heels in connection with Crime No.63/2007 registered for an offence punishable under Section 394 IPC in respect of a motorcycle. 2. The petitioners in B.A.880/2007 claim to be the Assistant Manager and Collection Co-ordinator respectively of a Financier, who had financed the loan to the defacto complainant. In B.A.916/2007, both petitioners claim to be the Assistant Managers of the Financier. According to the petitioners, consequent on the default committed by the defacto complainant in the re-payment of the loan, the Motorcycle was re-possessed by the Financier strictly in accordance with the terms of the contract. 3. The learned public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the first petitioner in B.A.880/2007 is the first accused in the case and other two accused persons were described as identifiable by sight. He also submitted that it is only after the interrogation of the first accused, can the B.A.Nos.880/2007 & 916/2007 2 Investigating Agency come to a conclusion as to whether the other petitioners are to be arrayed as accused or not. 4. Such being the position, even though I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, I am inclined to permit the first petitioner in B.A.880/2007 to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for regular bail considered by the Magistrate concerned. 5. Accordingly, Binesh, the first petitioner in B.A.880/2007, and who is the first accused in the aforementioned crime, shall surrender before the Investigating Officer on any day between 21.3.2007 and 23.3.2007 for the purpose of interrogation. He shall thereafter be produced on the same day before the Magistrate concerned, who shall release him on bail on appropriate conditions. 6. In the event of the arrest or threatened arrest of the other petitioners on being arrayed as accused in the case, they can move the Court for regular or anticipatory bail as the case may be. These applications are disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, mrcs JUDGE B.A.Nos.880/2007 & 916/2007 3