IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 478 of 2011()
1. NADEER, S/O. ABDUL LATHEEF,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAMESH BABU
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :27/01/2011
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
.........................................
B.A. No. 478 of 2011
..........................................
Dated this th 27th day of January, 2011.
ORDER
Petitioner who is the 3rd accused in Crime No. 49 of 2010 of
Museum Police Station for offences punishable under Sections
120B, 420, 465, 468 and 34 I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.
3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which
are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122
of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and
Others (2010 (4) KLT 930), I am of the view that
anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since
the investigating officer has not had the advantage of
interrogating the petitioner. But at the same time, I am inclined
to permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating
B.A. No. 478/2011 2
Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have his
application for bail considered by the Magistrate or the Court
having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender
before the investigating officer on 10.02.2011 or on 11.02.2011
for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating
material, if any. In case the investigating officer is of the view
that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the
petitioner is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest
in the case-diary as insisted in paragraph 129 of Siddharam
Satlingappa Mhetre’s case (supra). The petitioner shall thereafter
be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and
permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the
interrogation of the petitioner is without arresting him, the
petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the
Court concerned and apply for regular bail on the same day or
the next day. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that
B.A. No. 478/2011 3
the petitioner has been interrogated by the police shall, after
hearing the prosecution as well, consider and dispose of his
application for regular bail preferably on the same date on
which it is filed.
4. In case the accused while surrendering before the
Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer
sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the
interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above
and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court
concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be
bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was
not available after the production or appearance of the accused .
This petition is disposed of as above.
Dated this the 27th day of January, 2011.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
RV
B.A. No. 478/2011 4