IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5273 of 2009()
1. ALEX J.EDAKKATTU, S/O.CHACKO,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.K.R.SUNIL
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :17/09/2009
O R D E R
K.T.SANKARAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
B.A.No.5273 of 2009
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009
ORDER
This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is
accused No.6 in Crime No.315 of 2008 of Kanjirappally Police
Station.
2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under
Sections 143, 145, 147 and 353 read with Section 149 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused persons
caused obstruction to the official duties of the survey officials as
well as the police, in the matter of survey sought to be made for
the purpose of construction of waste management disposal plant
near Vizhikkathodu junction at Kanjirappally. The petitioner is
an advocate by profession. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that an action council was formed against
the construction of the waste management processing plant at
the place in question. The petitioner claims that he is the Chief
Patron of the action council. It is also submitted that W.P.(C)
BA No. 5273/2009 2
No.6663 of 2008 was filed by the office bearers of the action
council before the High Court challenging the decision to set up
the solid waste disposal plant at the place in question.
4. I have perused the judges papers in W.P.(C)No.6663
of 2008. It is seen that the Writ Petition was filed much earlier
to the date of incident in the present case. A Commissioner was
appointed in the proceedings. An interim order dated 10.4.2008
was passed to the effect that if the Panchayath wants to proceed
with the construction of the plant, the Panchayath shall obtain
prior permission of the court for starting the construction.
5. 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 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 not try to influence the prosecution
witnesses or tamper with the evidence;
BA No. 5273/2009 3
b) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in
any prejudicial activity while on bail;
The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated
above.
K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl