IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 855 of 2011() ---------------------------- (CRIME NO.188/2011 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION ) PETITIONERS :ACCUSED 1 TO 3: ------------------------------ 1. V.T.ALEXANDER, AGED 27, S/O.K.T.ALEXANDER, 28/2554 C, ALFA RETREAT, GOLDEN WATERS, CHILAVANNUR, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI. 2. K.T.ALEXANDER, AGED 63, 28/2554 C, ALFA RETREAT, GOLDEN WATERS, CHILAVANNUR, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI. 3. LAILA, W/O.K.T.ALEXANDER, AGED 52, 28/2554 C, ALFA RETREAT, GOLDEN WATERS, CHILAVANNUR, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HIRTHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.855 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011 ORDER The petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.188 of 2011 of Ernakulam Town South Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498-A & 420 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2010 (4) KLT 930), 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 petitioners. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have their application for bail disposed of by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before B.A.No.855/2011 -:2:- the investigating officer on 22/02/2011 or on 23/02/2011 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the investigating officer is of the view that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the petitioners is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest in the case diary as insisted in paragraph 129 of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre's case (supra). The petitioners 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 petitioners is without arresting them, the petitioners shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that the petitioners have been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of the application for regular bail filed by the 1st petitioner preferably on the same date on which it is filed and release the petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) on bail. 4. In case the petitioners while surrendering before the Investigating Officer have deprived the investigating officer B.A.No.855/2011 -:3:- 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 the accused. 5. The release of the petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) shall be on each of them 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. Petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays. 2. Petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) shall make themselves available for interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer. B.A.No.855/2011 -:4:- 3. Petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall they attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution. 4. Petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) shall not commit any offence while on bail. 5. If the petitioners 2 & 3 (A2 & A3) commit breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to them shall be liable to be cancelled. This petition is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj