IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 3068 of 2009()
1. PUTHANPURAYIL HASHIM,AGED 17 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. SIJAD, AGED 22 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL JALEEL,
3. MOHAMMED ALI, AGED 19 YEARS,
4. MOHAMMED NIYAS, AGED 19 YEARS,
5. CHATHOTH RASHEED, AGED 18 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY S.H.O.
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.M.PAREETH
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :18/06/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
----------------------------
B.A.No.3068 of 2009
----------------------------
Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are respectively
accused Nos.1, 3, 4, 6 and 7 in Crime No.171 of 2009 of Nadapuram
Police Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 143, 147, 148 and 506(1) read with Section 149 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
3. The prosecution case is that on 16.5.2009, while the
defacto complainant was coming from the place of his work, the
accused persons came in front of a mosque and hurled explosive
substances on him shouting that he must be killed.
4. I have gone through the case diary. Some of the persons,
questioned by the police, disclosed to the police that the first accused
had not gone out to the house on the date of the incident. One of his
relatives had come from abroad and the first accused was through out
in his house. Therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
first accused, Hashim.
BA No.3068/2009 2
5. In so far as the other petitioners are concerned, they stand
on a different footing. On going through the case diary, I am not,
prima facie, inclined to accept the case put forward by the learned
counsel for the petitioners that there are no materials to connect those
accused persons with the offence. The investigation is not complete
and if anticipatory bail is granted to petitioners No.2 to 5, it would
prejudicially affect the proper investigation of the case.
Accordingly, there will be a direction that in the event of the
arrest of the first accused (Hashim), the officer in charge of the police
station shall release him on bail for a period of one month on his
executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the
following conditions:
a) The first petitioner shall report before the investigating officer
between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final
report is filed or until further orders;
b) The first petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer
for interrogation as and when required;
c) The first petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution
witnesses or tamper with the evidence;
d) The first petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in
any prejudicial activity while on bail;
e) On the expiry of the period mentioned above, the first petitioner
shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular
BA No.3068/2009 3
bail;
f) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the
bail shall be liable to be cancelled.
The prayer for anticipatory bail made by petitioners No.2 to 5 is
rejected.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
second petitioner (Sijad), who is the third accused in the case, has to
appear for an examination on 24.6.2009 at Akbar Academy of Airline
Studies, Kozhikode. In the event of arrest of the second petitioner
(Sijad), arrangements shall be made to take him to the examination
centre on that day so that he can appear for the examination.
The Bail Application is partly allowed as above.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl