IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2008 / 4TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4003 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.819/2007 OF HILL PALACE POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED:- ------------------------------------- P.NISAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O KUNHIMOHAMMED, PATTATHIL HOUSE, P.O. CHAMARAVATTOM, TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HILL PALACE POLICE STATION, THRIPUNITHURA. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, C.B.C.I.D., ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.4003 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2008 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is the 8th accused. According to the prosecution, he procured forged invoices from the first accused and produced the same to claim an amount of Rs.3,80,000/- from PWD. A crime is registered under Sections 465 and 468 of IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that many other accused who are implicated with the same type of allegations as accused in the case were granted anticipatory bail in this case. 4. On going through the case, order dated 6.5.2008 in B.A.No.2758/08, B.A.No.2463/08 and B.A.No.1366/08, I find that both sides were heard by this Court and orders were issued in favour of co-accused in the same crime after considering the petitions filed by the co-accused for anticipatory bail. It can also be seen that the petitions were opposed by the learned DGP on the ground that the investigation is in the preliminary stage and that the complicity of the accused will be revealed only after BA No.4003/08 2 completion of the investigation. But, inspite of it, orders were granted in favour of the co-accused. 5. Though learned public prosecutor submitted that the petitioner will be required for custodial interrogation, in the light of the order passed in favour of the co-accused who are similarly placed, he finds it difficult to raise any objection. It is also brought to my notice that after the registration of the crime, dead body of the first accused was found in suspicious circumstances. 6. On hearing both sides, on the facts of this case, though I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail personally, in the light of the orders passed in favour of three similarly placed accused in the same crime, I find no ground to refuse the same benefit to the petitioner. (1) Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from the date of this order and make himself available for interrogation. (2) Thereafter, in the event of arrest of the petitioner, if any, he shall be produced before the Magistrate Court concerned, in accordance with law. BA No.4003/08 3 (3) On production of the petitioner before the Magistrate court and on filing of application, if any, for bail, the petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: (i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating officer on every Monday and Thursday between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. until further orders. (ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. (iii) If the petitioner gets involved in any offence of similar nature or tamper with the evidence or influence or intimidate any of the witnesses, bail is liable to be cancelled. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl