IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 8525 of 2010()
1. A.K.SHAJAHAN, AGED 49 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :28/12/2010
O R D E R
V.RAMKUMAR, J.
---------------------------------------------------
Bail Application No.8525 of 2010
-----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of December, 2010
ORDER
Petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No.1352 of 2010
of Sasthamkotta Police Station for an offence punishable
under Section 379 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 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 06/01/2011
Bail Appln.No.8525/2010
: 2 :
or on 07/01/2011 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. The Magistrate or the
Court on being satisfied that 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 petitioner while surrendering before
the Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating
officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall
Bail Appln.No.8525/2010
: 3 :
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 petitioner.
This petition is disposed of as above.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
skj