IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1415 of 2011() ------------------------ Crime No. 124 of 2011of Vadakkekara Police Station, Ernakulam PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------- 1. M.A.VIJAYA RAGHAVAN, AGED 65 YEARS, MEMANA MADHAM, MACHAMTHURUTH, VADAKKEKKARA, ERNAKULAM. 2. C.S.VENUGOPAL, AGED 47 YEARS, ARACKAL VEEDU, MACHAMTHURUTHU, VADAKKEKKARA, ERNAKULAM. 3. C.B.VALSA KUMAR, EDAYADIL, MACHAMTHURUTHU, VADAKKEKKARA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.124/2011 OF VADAKKEKKARA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) Public Prosecutor Sri. C.S. Hrithwik THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ................................... B.A. No.1415 of 2011 .................................. Dated: 03-03-2011 O R D E R In this Petition filed under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. the petitioners who are the accused in Crime No. 124 of 2011 of Vadakkekara Police Station, Ernakulam District, for offences punishabale under Sections 286 and 304 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the 3rd petitioner is not an accused and that petitioners 1 and 2 are respectively accused Nos. 4 and 5. If so, the request for anticipatory bail by the 3rd petitioner is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. The Public Prosecutor also conceded that the petitioners 1 and 2 have already been interrogated by the police. 3. While the festival of the Puthiyakavu Temple was conducted by the Committee of devottees by name Puthiyakavu Kshetra Bhakta Jana Samiti, it is not known as to why the petitioners 1 and 2 who do not belong to the Committee have been arrayed as accused and strangely enough members of the said Committee have been excluded from the array of Bail A.No. 1415 of 2011 -:2:- accused for the mishap, namely, the explosion of one Pop Gun which took pace resulting in the death of one person. 4. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2010 (4) KLT 930) ,, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1 and 2 . Accordingly, a direction is issued to the officer-in-charge of the police station concerned to release the petitioners 1 and 2 on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with the above case on each of them executing a bond for ` 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction to the said officer and subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioners 1 and 2 shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays. 2. Petitioners 1 and 2 shall make themselves available for interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. 3. Petitioners 1 and 2 shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the Bail A.No. 1415 of 2011 -:3:- prosecution. 4. Petitioners 1 and 2 shall not commit any offence while on bail. 5. The bail granted pursuant to this order shall be in force till the end of the trial of the case unless and until it is cancelled by this Court in accordance with paragraph 103 of the verdict in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre's case (supra). If the petitioners 1 and 2 commit breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to them shall be liable to be cancelled. This application is allowed as above. Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. ani/