IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2011 / 9TH BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6620 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.326/2011 OF PATTAMBI POLICE STATION PALAKKAD DISTRICT APPLICANT/2ND ACCUSED ------------------------- SADIQ ALI, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.MOIDHEENKUTTY, AANTHOORATHODI VEEDU, KAIPURAM HOUSE.P.O., OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. REPRESENTING THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.6620 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.326 of 2011 of Pattambi Police Station, Palakkad District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 323, 324, 452 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 20/08/2011, the following order was passed: “3. Accused No.1 is the father-in-law of the de facto complainant. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are respectively the brother-in-law and the mother-in- law of the de facto complainant. It is seen that the de facto complainant did not sustain any serious injuries. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the Bail Appln.No.6620/2011 : 2 : investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 25/08/2011 and 26/08/2011. 5. Post on 31/08/2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.326 of 2011 of Pattambi Police Station, till 02/09/2011. 7. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 20/08/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 20/08/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand Bail Appln.No.6620/2011 : 3 : only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj True copy P.A. to Judge