High Court Kerala High Court

Purushothaman Khatri vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 30 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
Purushothaman Khatri vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 30 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4861 of 2009()


1. PURUSHOTHAMAN KHATRI, S/O.ACHALARAM,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NARAYAN KHATRI, S/O.ACHALARAM,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ARUN PETER CHETTIYATT

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :30/10/2009

 O R D E R
                        K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                      ---------------------------
                      B.A. No. 4861 of 2009
                  ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 30th day of October, 2009

                             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.332/2009 of Kottayam West Police

Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

20.10.2009, the following order was passed:

“After having heard the learned counsel for

the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor,

I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail

Application, an opportunity should be given to

the petitioners to appear before the investigating

officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to

the petitioners to appear before the investigating

officer at 9 A.M. on 26th and 27th October, 2009.

Post on 30.10.2009.

It is submitted by the learned Public

Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be

arrested until further orders in connection with

B.A. No. 4861 of 2009 2

Crime No.332/2009 of Kottayam West Police

Station.

Hand over copy of this order to both sides.”

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners have complied

with the directions in the order dated 20.10.2009.

4. 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 all alternate Mondays, 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;

C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with the
evidence.

B.A. No. 4861 of 2009 3

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