IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3402 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.332/08 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION) .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.2: ------------------------------ SUNEER, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.BASHEER, RESIDING AT THARAMANNIL HOUSE, ADUKKAM P.O., CHAMAPARA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEO PAUL SRI.SANU MATHEW RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I.OF POLICE, PANANGADU POLICE STATION, BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3402 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2008 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is the second accused in crime No.332/08 of Panangad Police Station registered under Section 67 of Information Technology Act read with Section 34 of IPC. According to the prosecution, third and fourth accused in the crime who are employees of the petitioner transferred some obscene materials to the mobile phone of the first accused from the computer kept in petitioner's shop. This was allegedly done with the permission and connivance of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is running a mobile service shop. But he is not aware of the offence committed by the employees. Petitioner is doing business at Kottayam and not at Kochi and after arrest of the employees, shop is closed down and he is not doing any business there. Even as per the records available, it is submitted that the BA NO.3402/08 2 petitioner was nowhere in the picture and he was not a person in the shop. 4. Learned public prosecutor on instructions submitted that he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner provided. Petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating Officer for interrogation as and when required. 5. Hence, the respondent is directed to release the petitioner in the event of his arrest on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that the petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him for the purpose of interrogation in connection with the crime. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl