High Court Kerala High Court

Xavi Raphel.M vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 16 December, 2009

Kerala High Court
Xavi Raphel.M vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 16 December, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6231 of 2009()


1. XAVI RAPHEL.M, AGED 51 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :16/12/2009

 O R D E R
                           K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                         B.A.No.6231 of 2009
                  ---------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 18th day of December, 2009


                               ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the sole

accused in Crime No.549 of 2009 of Thrissur Town East Police

Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 406, 418 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 2nd

December, 2009, the following order was passed:

“After having heard the learned counsel

for the petitioner and the learned Public

Prosecutor, I am of the view that before disposing

of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be

given to the petitioner to appear before the

investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a

direction to the petitioner to appear before the

investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 10th and 11th

December, 2009.

Post on 16.12.2009.

It is submitted by the learned Public

Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested

BA No.6231/2009 2

until further orders in connection with Crime No.

549 of 2009 of Thrissur Town East Police

Station.”

The petitioner shall produce copy of this

order before the investigating officer.

The investigating officer shall make every

endeavour to ensure the presence of the de facto

complainant so as to afford an opportunity to the

parties to settle the disputes.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioner that the disputes and differences between the

petitioner and the de facto complainant have been settled

between them.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the

de facto complainant also appeared before the investigating

officer and the matter was settled between the parties. He

added that in view of the settlement, it is not necessary to arrest

the petitioner. This submission is recorded and the Bail

Application is closed.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl

BA No.6231/2009 3

K.T.SANKARAN, J.

———————————————

B.A.No.6231 of 2009

———————————————
Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009

ORDER

Heard the counsel for quite some time. The learned

BA No.6231/2009 4

counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would

like to settle the dispute with the de facto complainant.

Post after two weeks.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the

petitioner will not be arrested till the next posting date.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl