IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2011 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 9638 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.983/2011 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED(A5) --------------------------------- SARATH KUMAR,BHATTATHIRI, S/O.SANKARA BHATTATHIRI,CHITHRATHOOR MADAM, PANDANADU PANCHAYATH,WARD NO.5,MUTHUVAZHY MURI, PANDANADU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.983/11 OF CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT) 682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RENJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.9638 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of December, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.5 in Crime No.983 of 2011 of Chengannur Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120B, 457 and 380 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that on 19.10.2011, pursuant to the conspiracy hatched by the accused persons, the Thazhikakkudam of Sreekumaramangalam Subramanya Swami temple at Muthuvazhy was removed by accused Nos.6, 7 and 8. The accused were under the impression that the Thazhikakkudam contains iridium, a very valuable metal. The Thazhikakkudam was later found in a nearby compound on 22.10.2011. The petitioner is a member of the family which owned the temple. The administration of the temple was later given to the committee of the local people. There were BA 9638/11 2 litigations in respect of the administration and management of the temple. It is alleged that the petitioner entertained a belief that the Thazhikakkudam contained iridium and therefore, he wanted to grab the administration of the temple to facilitate him to remove the Thazhikakkudam. 4. The petitioner was arrested on 23.10.2011 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the investigation has progressed much. 6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that accused Nos.1 and 9 are yet to be arrested. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner with effect from 20.12.2011. The petitioner shall be released on bail only on 20.12.2011 on his executing bond for ` 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, BA 9638/11 3 Chengannur, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays and Thursdays for a period of two months and thereafter on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; D) The petitioner 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 as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl