IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 29TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 725 of 2009(A) ----------------------------------- CMP.1083/2009 of J.M.F.C.-III,NEYYATTINKARA CRIME NO.40/2008 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED : ----------------------------------- PRAVEEN @ CHAKKARA, AGED 23, S/O. PRABHAKARAN, PRAVEEN NIVAS, RAMAPURAM ANTHIYOOR DESOM, KOTTUKAL VILLAGE, NOW RESIDING AT JOUDES VEDU, R.C. STREET, BALARAMAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= B.A. No. 725 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 18th day of February, 2009 O R D E R Petition for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 363 and 366A read with section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner (A2) in furtherance of common intention committed various offences. The 1st accused was in love with the minor girl and they were taken to the Railway Station by petitioner in his car. Thereafter, 1st accused took the girl to Bangalore and then to Mysore. When they were in need of money, information was conveyed to 2nd accused who took money to Mysore and gave it to the 1st accused and thereby committed various offences. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was arrested on 31-1-2009. Petitioner and his wife were computer engineers and 1st accused was working with the petitioner and he was attending house hold work. He is an orphan. He is helped by petitioner being an orphan who works for him, but he has not committed any offence, as alleged. The 1st accused had taken the car and the car was seized by the police when found in an abandoned stage. Application was filed by petitioner's wife for release of the vehicle. If the allegations are true, petitioner would not have abandoned the vehicle and hence, the allegations are not correct. Except that petitioner BA 725/09 -2- gave some money to 1st petitioner, there is no involvement of petitioner in the offence. Hence, bail may be granted, it is submitted. 4. Considering the stage of investigation, this petition is not opposed. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that bail can be granted to petitioner on conditions. 6. Hence, petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions:- 1) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. 2) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail and in case breach of this condition, bail is liable to be cancelled. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.