IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8046 of 2011 CRIME NO.664 OF 2011 OF IDUKKI POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1- 4 -------------------------------------------- 1. SATHYAN, AGED 46, S/O.GOPALAN, KUNNUPURATHU, CHERUTHONY, IDUKKI - 685566. 2. SAJI, AGED 31 YEARS, EDAKKULATHIL, MANIYARAMKUDI, CHERUTHONY, IDUKKI - 685566. 3. SABEESH P., AGED 37 YEARS, PALAKKATHARAYIL, IDUKKI COLONY, IDUKKI - 685566. 4. ABBAS @ K.K.KABEER, AGED 29 KANDATHIKKARA, IDUKKI COLONY, IDUKKI - 685566. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.NAZAR SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, IDUKKI POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 9/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 8046 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of December, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1, 4, 2 and 3 in Crime No.664 of 2011 of Idukki Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 448, 324, 294(b), 353 and 506(i) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(a) of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act . . 3. The prosecution case is that on 24.9.2011, while a meeting of the committee of the Panchayat was going on, the accused persons who constituted the opposition walked out. Thereafter, they came back and rushed to the conference hall. They abused the defacto complainant and shouted slogans. The accused wanted the Panchayat to withdraw the Waste Management Programme, in which, according to the petitioners, there was corruption. It is also BAIL APPL. NO.8046 OF 2011 :: 2 :: alleged that the accused destroyed cups and saucers and caused a loss of `500/-. On account of the throwing of the cups and saucers, the defacto complainant sustained injuries as well. 4. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 28th November, 2011, the following order was passed: “4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioners should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer on 3rd and 4th December, 2011. 6. Post on 9th December, 2011. 7. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.664 of 2011 of Idukki Police Station, till 13th December, 2011. BAIL APPL. NO.8046 OF 2011 :: 3 :: 8. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the direction in the order dated 28th November, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 28th November, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioners, 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 `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; BAIL APPL. NO.8046 OF 2011 :: 4 :: 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 ahz/