IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1169 of 2010() --------------------------------- CRIME NO. 66/2010 0F KONNI POLICE STATION ...................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND NO.2 : ----------------------------------------------- 1. JOSHUA DANIEL, S/O. DANIEL, AGED 53 YEARS, PADARICKAL VEEDU, MAMOOD, KONNI. 2. VARGHESE @ KUNJUMON, AGED 51 YEARS, S/O. GEORGE, THAYYIL VEEDU, MAMOOD, KONNI. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KONNI POLICE STATION. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1169 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 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.1 and 2 in Crime No.66/2010 of Konni Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 294(b) and 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant is the Deputy Ranger of Karippamthode Forest Station, Konni. The prosecution case is that on 27.01.2010 at about 9 P.M., the accused persons did not allow the forest guard on duty in the check post to inspect the jeep in which the accused persons came near the check post. Accused No.2 was driving the jeep. It is stated that the first accused is the owner of the jeep. The forest guard informed the de facto complainant about the objection made by the accused to inspect the vehicle. The de facto complainant came to the spot. He was abused by the accused in filthy language and he was obstructed from discharging his official duties. In spite of the resistance by B.A. No. 1169/2010 2 the accused, the vehicle was inspected. However, no contraband was found in the vehicle. 4. The petitioners say that they were manhandled by the forest officials and they were admitted in the hospital on 28.01.2010. Annexures A2 and A3 discharge summary issued by Believers Church Medical Centre are produced in support of the contention put forward by the petitioners. 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 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 every Monday, 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; B.A. No. 1169/2010 3 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