IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JANUARY 2010 / 22TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6815 of 2009() ----------------------------------------- CRIME NO.288/2009 OF PERINGOME POLICE STATION, KANNUR. .................... PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED 1 TO 5: ----------------------------------------------- 1. MURALIDHARAN, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.KANAKRISHNAN, KUNNUMTHARA, VAYAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.PADIYOTCHAL, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. VENU T.V, S/O. VALAPPAN RAMAN AGED 34 YEARS, THOLUR VEEDU VAYAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.PADIYOTCHAL, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. RAKESH T.V, S/O.RAGHAVAN VAYAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.PADIYOTCHAL, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. SASIDHARAN K, S/O.RAGHAVAN,AFGED 36 YEAR KADEKKARA HOUSE, KAKKAYANCHAL, P.O.CHERUPUZHA KANNUR DISTRICT. 5. SUNDARAN C.V, S/O.KOMAN, AGED 34 YEARS CHENTHALA VEEDU,VAYAKKARA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.PADIYOTCHAL, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURAJ.S RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------- THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PERINGOME POLICE STATIOIN, KANNUR DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI.TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6815 of 2009 ----------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of January, 2010 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 to 5 in Crime No.288/2009 of Peringome Police Station, Kannur. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 324 and 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 11/10/2009, the petitioners attacked one Subair Arayapurath and inmates of his house and neighbours who were present in the house. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in respect of the incident which occurred on the same date, Crime No.289/2009 was registered, in which Subair Arayapurath and others are the accused. 5. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 16/12/2009, the following order was passed: “The counsel appearing for the parties submit that B.A. No. 6815 / 2009 2 two cases were registered in respect of the incident which took place on 11.10.2009, namely, Crime Nos. 288 of 2009 and 289 of 2009. Persons on either side sustained grievous injuries. The parties are known to each other. The counsel also submit that the parties may be given an opportunity to settle the whole dispute. The request is just and reasonable. Post in the 2nd week of January 2010. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners will not be arrested in the aforesaid crimes till then.” 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the accused in Crime No.289/2009 (who are the de facto complainant and other injured persons in Crime No.288/2009) submitted that the disputes and differences between the parties have been settled. 7. Taking into account the 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 B.A. No. 6815 / 2009 3 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: 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 scm