IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 16TH BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6589 of 2011 CRIME NO.205 OF 2011 OF CHITTAR POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- 1. GOPALAKRISHNAN @ RAJAN, AGED 48 YEARS, MANIYANPARA HOUSE, CHITTAR SEETHATHODE VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. RAJEEV @ JAYAKRISHNAN, AGED 30 YEARS, RAJESH BHAVAN, CHITTAR SEETHATHODE VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------- 1. THE S.I.OF POLICE, CHITTAR POLICE STAITION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 6589 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th day of September, 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 and 2 in Crime No.205 of 2011 of Chittar Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 452, 506(ii), 323 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the de facto complainant's husband is an accused in Sessions Case No.99 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Pathanamthitta, and the trial was going on in that case. In that case, the first petitioner in the present case is the de facto complainant. The counsel submitted that the present case is foisted against the petitioner. Bail Appl. NO.6589 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 4. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 29th August, 2011, the following order was passed: “4. 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 2nd and 3rd September, 2011. 5. Post on 6th September, 2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.205 of 2011 of Chittar Police Station, Pathanamthitta District, till 7th September, 2011. The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” Bail Appl. NO.6589 OF 2011 :: 3 :: 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 29th August, 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 29th August, 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 report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, for a period of two months; b) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; Bail Appl. NO.6589 OF 2011 :: 4 :: d) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) 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/