IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 36 of 2008() --------------------------- CRIME NO.727/2007 OF KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION : PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------------------ 1. MATHAI, S/O.PAULOSE, KANIYAMKUDY, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. HARI, S/O.AYYAPPANKUTTY, THANDIKAKUDY, NADUKANI, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. LAIJU, S/O.KUMARAN, AMBATTUKUNNEL, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 4. BASIL, S/O.PAULOSE, KUZHUTHAKOTTIL, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 5. MURALI, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, MOOLEMOLATH, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 6. SHAJI, S/O.VARKEY, PULIMOOTTIL, KEERAMPARA, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT & STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.36 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners face allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 326 r/w 149 I.P.C. There is a counter case also. The accused in the counter case has already been granted anticipatory bail. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners apprehend imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties have been amicably settled. Even though the offence punishable under Section 326 I.P.C is not compoundable, the fact of composition, though proceedings can be dropped on that ground, may be taken note of by this Court along with other circumstances to issue directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. He confirms from the further statement of the defacto complainant recorded by the Investigating Officer on 08.01.08 that the disputes have been settled. I am satisfied that directions under Section 438 Cr.P.C can, in these circumstances, be issued in favour of the petitioner. B.A.No.36 of 2008 2 4. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 21.01.08. They shall be enlarged on regular bail on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 3 p.m on 22.01.08 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender on 21.01.08 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be released from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) each without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 21.01.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/- B.A.No.36 of 2008 3