IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2009 / 16TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4147 of 2009 CRIME NO.377 OF 2009 OF OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS 2 & 3 ------------------------------------------------- 1. CHENTHAMARA @ CHENTHAMARAKSHAN, S/O.GOPALAN, KUNNATHPADI VEEDU, AKALAUR POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 2. MANI @ SUKUMARAN, S/O.SANKUNNI, POOKATH PARAMBU VEEDU, 'DO' 'DO' BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER, OTTAPALAM POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ON 07/08/2009, ALONGWITH B.A.NO.4148 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NOS.4147 & 4148 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 7th August, 2009 O R D E R B.A.No.4147 of 2009 is filed by Chenthamara @ Chenthamarakshan and Mani @ Sukumaran, who are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.377 of 2009 of Ottapalam Police Station. B.A.No.4148 of 2009 is filed by Mani @ Sukumaran, who is accused No.3 in Crime No.378 of 2009 of Ottapalam Police Station. 2. The petitioners in these Bail Applications are accused persons in Crime No.365 of 2009 of Ottapalam Police Station also and they were granted bail as per the order dated 10.7.2009 in B.A.No.3681 of 2009. They were arrested in Crime No.365 of 2009 on 11.6.2009. In respect of some other accused in Crime No.377 of 2009, their arrest was recorded in that crime and therefore, they could move B.A.No.3693 of 2009 and this Court granted bail to them as per the order dated 10.7.2009. The petitioners submit that though they moved an application for regular bail before this Court, that application was dismissed on the ground that their formal arrest was not recorded in Crime No.377 of 2009. However, the petitioners in B.A. NOS.4147 & 4148 OF 2009 :: 2 :: these Bail Applications were released from jail as their formal arrest was not recorded either in Crime No.377 of 2009 or in Crime No.378 of 2009. Now the petitioners apprehend arrest in these two cases, namely, Crime Nos.377 of 2009 and 378 of 2009. 3. It is not disputed that the petitioners were arrested on 11.6.2009 and they were ordered to be released on bail only on 10.7.2009. They could not successfully maintain a bail application in Crime Nos.377 of 2009 and 378 of 2009 for the grant of regular bail as their formal arrest was not recorded in those cases. The result is that some of the co-accused in Crime No.377 of 2009, who are also arrested along with the petitioners in Crime No.365 of 2009, were released on bail in all the cases, while the petitioners, though they underwent the same period in judicial custody, are now faced with the threat of arrest in two crimes. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the injury sustained and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners in these two crimes. Accordingly, there will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in B.A. NOS.4147 & 4148 OF 2009 :: 3 :: charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- 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 report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays and Thursdays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; 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; 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/