IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2011 / 3RD BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6306 of 2011 CRMP.683/2011 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.447 OF 2011 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.1: --------------------------- SUJITH KUMAR S., AGED 31 YEARS, S/O.SIVADASAN NAIR, POKKADATHU HOUSE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J. RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SHO, ADOOR POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 6306 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of August, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.447 of 2011 of Adoor Police Station, Pathanamthitta District. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 380, 454 and 461 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 17.2.2011 at 3 P.M., the Maruti car belonging to the de facto complainant was removed from his residential compound by the accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the Manager of Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Limited. The car was hypothecated to Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services Limited. and, as per the order passed by the Arbitrator, the vehicle was re- possessed. It is submitted that no offence as alleged is made out Bail Appl. NO.6306 of 2011 :: 2 :: against the petitioner and the other accused. The petitioner relied on the decisions in Bharudan Dugar v. S.I. of Police (1986 KLT 430) and ING Vysa Bank Ltd. v. Sub Inspector of Police (2011 (2) KLT 621) in support of his contention. 4. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 10th 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 petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 18th August, 2011. 5. Post on 23rd August, 2011. 6. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.447 of 2011 of Adoor Police Station, till 26th August, 2011. Bail Appl. NO.6306 of 2011 :: 3 :: 7. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the direction in the order dated 10th August, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 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 10th August, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: Bail Appl. NO.6306 of 2011 :: 4 :: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner 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/