IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAIHTA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 3516 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.157/2011 OF VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ----------------------- 1. JACOB.C.VAZHAKOOTTAM,AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.CHACKO,VAZHAKOOTTAM HOUSE,VILAYOOR.P.O, VILAYOOR VILLAGE,OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. KHALID,AGED 52 YEARS,S/O.KUNJUNNI, KARIMPANACKAL HOUSE,PULAMANTHOL,MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.DIPU JAMES SMT.K.V.RAMYA RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,CHALAKUDY POLICE STATION,THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KORATTY POLICE STATION,THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------- Bail Application No.3516 of 2011 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011 ORDER First petitioner, who is accused No.4 in Crime No.157 of 2011 of Vellikulangara Police Station for theft of rubber sheets and punishable under Section 379 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the first petitioner is the 4th accused and the second petitioner is not an accused in this case. If so, the apprehension of arrest and harassment entertained by the second petitioner is unfounded. This petition so far as it relates to the second petitioner is accordingly dismissed. 3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 112 of the verdict of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others - (2011) 1 SCC 694 , I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the first petitioner (A4). Accordingly, first petitioner (A4) is directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 03/06/2011 or on 04/06/2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case first petitioner (A4) is arrested by the Investigating Officer before interrogation, first petitioner (A4) shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In B.A.No.3516/2011 2 case the interrogation of first petitioner (A4) is without arresting him, the petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned on the same day or the next day and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that first petitioner (A4) has been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of his application for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed. In case first petitioner (A4) while surrendering before the Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was not available after the production or appearance of first petitioner (A4). This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj