IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 4856 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.171/2011 OF CHERPULASSERY POLICE STATION PALAKKAD DISTRICT PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 7 : -------------------------------- 1. PAMBAVASAN, S/O.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 41 YEARS, VELLATTUTHODI HOUSE, "KAILASAM", MUNNOORKKODU, THRIKKADEERI P.O., OTTAPPALAM VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. KALADEVI PAMBAVASAN, W/O.PAMBAVASAN, AGED 35, VELLATTUTHODI HOUSE, "KAILASAM", MUNNOORKKODU, THRIKKADEERI P.O., OTTAPPALAM VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. MURALEEDHARAN, S/O.MADHAVAN NAIR, AGED 36, VELLATTUTHODI HOUSE, "KAILASAM", MUNNOORKKODU, THRIKKADEERI P.O., OTTAPPALAM VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. SURESHKUMAR P.K., S/O.KESAVAN NAIR, AGED 41, PUTHUKKUDI HOUSE, THARUVAKKONAM, PANAMANNA, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. SANTHOSH, S/O.DIVAKARAN NAIR, AGED 31, MUNDANCHERRY HOUSE, PARASSERI, KONGAD VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. GOVINDADASAN, S/O.RAMAWARRIER, AGED 58, KEDARAM HOUSE, VELLINEZHI P.P., OTTAPALAM VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. B.A.No.4856/2011 7. SREEDHARAN MASTER K.M., AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.DEVAN NAMBOODHIRI, PATHIRIKUNNATHU MANA, KAVUVATTAM P.O., CHERPULASSERI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHERPULASSERI POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 679 503. Addl.R2: DR.AMBATT PALLIYALIL SETHUMADHAVAN, S/O.KUNHIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, PUTHIYAVEEDU, EDAPPALAM.P.O.-679 308. NADUVATTOM VIA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. (KARUNYA HOSPITAL, KAVUVATTOM CHERUPLASSERY) (Addl.R2 impleaded as per order dated 11/7/2011 in Crl.M.Appln.No.4067/11 in B.A.No.4856/11.) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV ADV. SRI.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR FOR R2 THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.4856 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of November, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 7 in Crime No.171 of 2011 of Cherpulassery Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 423, 465, 466, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant was impleaded as additional respondent No.2, in compliance with the order dated 27/06/2011 passed by this Court. 4. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 11/07/2011, the following order was passed:- “It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant that if the parties are referred to Mediation, it is most likely that the matter would be settled. Accordingly, the matter is referred to Mediation. The parties shall appear before the B.A.No.4856/2011 2 Mediation Centre on 29/07/2011. The interim order is extended till the matter is considered by the Mediation Centre.” 5. Before the Mediation Centre, the parties arrived at a settlement. An agreement was executed by the parties. The Mediator reported that in compliance with the terms of the agreement, the first petitioner (Pambavasan) handed over a Demand Draft for Rupees Thirty five lakhs and said Demand Draft was kept in safe custody at the Mediation Centre. 6. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 07th September, 2011, the following order was passed:- “It is submitted by the counsel appearing for the parties that the disputes between parties were settled at the Mediation Centre as per an agreement executed among them. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the conditions have been complied with by the petitioners. On compliance of those conditions, the demand draft for Rupees Thirty five lakhs entrusted to the Mediation Centre is liable to be delivered to the de facto complainant (additional second respondent). It is stated that the demand draft is not received by the de facto complainant. B.A.No.4856/2011 3 Post after vacation. The interim order is extended till 22/09/2011.” 7. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent submitted today that the Demand Draft for Rupees Thirty five lakhs was received by the second respondent from the Mediation Centre. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the second respondent that all the disputes between the parties have been amicably settled. 8. In view of the settlement of the case, I am of the view that the petitioners are entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail. 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; B.A.No.4856/2011 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. The original of the agreement dated 29th July, 2011 executed by the parties before the Mediation Centre will be handed over to the petitioners, after issuing a certified photo copy of the same to the second respondent. If no application is made for certified copy by the second respondent within two weeks from today the original will be handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioners. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj