IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2011 / 11TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5771 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.251/2011 OF PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PETITIONER : 2ND ACCUSED ------------------------------- CHANDRAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.THANKAPPAN, KANDAKATHARA CHIRA HOUSE, PERUMBALAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5771 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 02nd day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.251 of 2011 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 22/07/2011, the following order was passed: “3. The prosecution case is that accused No.1, who was a married man with two children, approached the de facto complainant and proposed a marriage, concealing the marital relationship of the first accused with another lady. The prosecution case is that accused Nos.1 and 2 together went to the house of the de facto complainant on 9.4.2011. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating Bail Appln.No.5771/2011 : 2 : officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 27th and 28th July, 2011. 5. Post on 2nd August, 2011. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.251 of 2011 of Puthencruz Police Station, Ernakulam District, till 5th August, 2011”. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 22/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 22/07/2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, 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 `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: Bail Appln.No.5771/2011 : 3 : a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all 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. Sd/- K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj True copy P.A. to Judge