IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 6055 of 2009()
1. E.A.JOHNY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. S.I.OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAMESH BABU
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :21/01/2010
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------
B.A. No. 6055 of 2009
------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of January, 2010
O R D E R
When the Bail Application came up for hearing on
11/01/2010, the following order was passed:
“This is an application for anticipatory bail
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime
No.1125 of 2009 of Chalakudy Police Station.
2. The offence alleged against the petitioner
is under Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused
persons dumped 13 lorry loads of quarry waste in a
government property in order to facilitate trespass
upon the government land to form a pathway to
the work site of the three star hotel owned by some
of the accused.
4. It is stated that a Writ Petition (W.P.(C)
No.23896 of 2007) is pending before the High
Court, in which Annexure AI order dated 6.8.2007
was passed, directing that while fencing the
property in question, the access of the petitioner to
his own property shall not be blocked. The
petitioner in the Writ Petition is the Chalakudy
Hotels Private Limited. It is stated that the
petitioner herein is a Director of that Company.
B.A. No. 6055/2009
2
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the Managing Director of the Company submitted
a petition dated 7.10.2009 before the District Collector
stating that they do not claim any ownership over the
property in question and that the quarry waste was
dumped by mistake.
6. 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 AM on
18th and 19th January, 2010. The petitioner shall
produce a copy of the order before the investigating
officer.
7.Post on 21st January, 2010.
It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor
that the petitioner will not be arrested until further
orders. ”
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the
petitioner has complied with the direction contained in the order
dated 11/01/2010.
3. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of
B.A. No. 6055/2009
3
the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner.
There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the
petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release
him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two
solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
officer concerned, subject to the following conditions:
A) The petitioner shall report before the
investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M.
on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed
or until further orders;
B) The petitioner shall appear before the
investigating officer for interrogation as and
when required;
C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with the
evidence.
D) The petitioner 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
scm