IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6435 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1204/2009 OF THOPPUMPADY POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. MARSALAS ANTONY, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, KOLLA SHANAYIL, MUNDAMVELI, THOPPUMPADI, ERNAKULAM. 2. MAGY ANTONY, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY, KOLLA SHANAYIL, MUNDAMVELI, THOPPUMPADI, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO. 1204 OF 2009 OF THOPPUMPADY POLICE STATION). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6435 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused persons in Crime No.1204 of 2009 of Thoppumpady Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The petitioners filed Bail Application No.4095 of 2009 for anticipatory bail and it was disposed of by the order dated 27th July 2009. That order reads as follows: “Apprehending arrest by the Thoppumpady police on an accusation of having committed non bailable offence, the petitioners have filed this Bail Application. It is stated that the wife of the first petitioner has approached the police. Learned public prosecutor submitted that on the basis of the information given by the wife of the first petitioner, the petitioner was called to the police station. The disputes between the parties were settled and therefore, no crime was BA No.6435/2009 2 registered. It is submitted by the learned public prosecutor that there is no intention to arrest the petitioners. This submission is recorded and the Bail Application is closed.” 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that after passing the order dated 27th July 2009, the de facto complainant filed a complaint before the Magistrate's court and the complaint was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was registered. 5. Taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.10,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: BA No.6435/2009 3 a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners 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 csl