IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6116 of 2009() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.383/2009 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION. PETITIONERS (S)/ ACCUSED ----------------------------- 1. GAMESH K.T.K. S/O. GOPALAN, AYIRUNDATHIL MEETHAL, P.O.MANTHARATHUR, THODUNNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. SHEFEEQUE, S/O. ABDULLA, MEETHALE CHERYANDIYIL, P.O.MANTHARATHUR, THODANNUR, VATAKARA. 3. UNNAISE M.C.S/O. IBRAHIM, MEETHALE CHERIYANDIYIL, P.O. MANTHARATHUR, THODANNUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. FIRDOUSE T.K.C. THACHAR KANDI CHALIL, P.O.MANTHARATHUR, THODANNUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. ROUF M.P., S/O. ABDULLA, MEETHALE PRATTIL, P.O.MANTHARATHUR, THODANNUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.C.VALSALAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,(S.I. OF POLICE VATAKARA IN CRIME NO.383/2009) REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6116 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.7, 8, 2, 10 and 9 respectively in Crime No.383/2009 of Vatakara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323, 341, 324 and 308 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 29.10.2009, the following order was passed: “After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 4th and 5th November, 2009. Post on 12.11.2009. B.A. No. 6116 of 2009 2 It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.383/2009 of Vatakara Police Station. Hand over copy to both sides.” 4. Later, on 17.11.2009 another order was passed, the relevant portion of which reads as follows: “The petitioner has filed an application stating that the counsel mistook the order as a final order and applied for a copy of the order. Therefore, he could not communicate to the petitioner the correct details and thus the petitioner could not appear before the investigating officer on 4th and 5th November, 2009. The prayer for extension of time was granted. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is permitted to appear before the investigating officer on 20th and 21st November, 2009 at 9 A.M. Post on 25th November, 2009.” 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners have complied with the direction contained in the order dated 17.11.2009. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of B.A. No. 6116 of 2009 3 the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. 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 Rs. 15,000/- 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 alternate Mondays, 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 ln