IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 4175 of 2011() --------------------------------- CRIME NO. 102/2011 of ULIKAL POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 TO 3:- -------------------------------------- 1. SUNIL JOHN THOMAS,AGED 30, S/O.THOMAS,ELAVUMKAL HOUSE,MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY WEST PO, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. E.J.THOMAS,S/O.JOHN,AGED 65, ELAVUMKAL HOUSE,MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY WEST PO, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. ALEYAMMA,W/O.THOMAS,AGED 60 YEARS, ELAVUMKAL HOUSE,MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY WEST PO, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM SAMSON SMT.LOVELY SAMSON RESPONDENT/STATE:- -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,POLICE STATION, CHENGANNUR,BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM,KOCHI-31. ADV. SRI. C.S. HRITHWIK, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ......................................... B.A. No. 4175 of 2011 .......................................... Dated this the 6th day of June, 2011. ORDER Petitioners who are accused Nos. 1 to 3 in Crime No. 102 of 2011 of Ulikal Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406 and 34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that petitioners 2 and 3 who are initially accused Nos.2 and 3, have since been deleted from the array of accused and at present the 1st petitioner who is the husband of the de facto complainant, is the sole accused. If so, the apprehension of arrest and harassment entertained by petitioners 2 and 3 is unfounded. This application so far as it relates to petitioners 2 and 3 will stand dismissed. 3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration under 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, B.A.No. 4175/2011 -:2:- since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioner. Accordingly, the first petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer on 17.06.2011 or on 18.06.2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the petitioner is arrested by the Investigating Officer before interrogation, the petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the interrogation of the first petitioner is without arresting him, the said petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned on the same day or on the next day and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that the first petitioner has been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, release him on bail. 4. In case the first petitioner while surrendering before the Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the B.A.No. 4175/2011 -:3:- 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 the petitioner. 5. The release of the first petitioner shall be on the petitioner executing a bond for `15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and subject to the following conditions:- 1. The first petitioner (A1) shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays till the filing of the final report. 2. The first petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who is acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him or her from disclosing any information to the Court or to the police or to any other person in authority. 3. The first petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation as and when required by the police at any time till the filing of the final report. B.A.No. 4175/2011 -:4:- 4. The first petitioner shall not establish any contact with any of the witnesses or accused in the case. 5. The first petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses or the victims nor shall he attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution. 6. The first petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail. 7. The first petitioner shall notify to the Court his place of residence before executing the bail bond. 8. If the first petitioner commits breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled. This petition is disposed of as above. Dated this the 6th day of June, 2011. sd/- V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv //True Copy// P.A to Judge.