IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 8002 of 2010()
1. B.M.XAVIER, AGED 47 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.JAISON JOSEPH
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :10/12/2010
O R D E R
V.RAMKUMAR, J.
---------------------------------------------------
Bail Application No.8002 of 2010
-----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010
ORDER
Petitioner, who is accused No.1 in Crime No.3295 of
2010 of Aluva Police Station for an offence punishable under
Section 394 read with Section 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 (Crl.Appeal No. 2271 of 2010),
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.
Bail Appln.No.8002/2010
: 2 :
Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the
investigating officer on 20/12/2010 or on 21/12/2010 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
Bail Appln.No.8002/2010
: 3 :
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 petitioner.
This petition is disposed of as above.
Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
skj