IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4064 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.287/2009 OF THALASSERY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- T.RAMESHAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, DRIVER, NANDANAM, CHOYADAM, KADIRUR. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE -------------------------------- 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THALASSERY POLICE STATION. 2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.4064 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.4 in Crime No.287 of 2009 of Thalassery Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427 and 153A read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation in the FI statement is that the defacto complainant purchased a plot of land and he started constructing a house therein. The neighbouring property owners had removed the door frame and window frame of the new house under construction and on a petition filed by the defacto complainant, they were called to the police station and the matter was settled. After a few days thereafter, about 25 persons caused damage to the house under construction. The watcher had reported the matter to the defacto complainant and BA No.4064/2009 2 accordingly, the FI statement was lodged. 4. The petitioner states that the petitioner's mother had filed a petition dated 7.2.2009 to the Sub Inspector of Police, Thalassery stating that the defacto complainant had attempted to encroach upon the pathway leading to her house. It is submitted by the petitioner that no action was taken by the police on that petition. According to the petitioner, the present case is foisted against him and others only to cover up the illegal acts of the defacto complainant. It would appear that there are civil disputes between the parties. Such disputes are to be settled through civil court, submits the petitioner. While disposing of this Bail Application, it is not necessary to arrive at any conclusion on the merits of the contention put forward by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the BA No.4064/2009 3 officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner 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 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 to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl