High Court Kerala High Court

Baiju vs State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
Baiju vs State Of Kerala on 16 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6072 of 2009()


1. BAIJU, 36 YEARS, S/O.NADESAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.M.MADHUBEN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :16/11/2009

 O R D E R
                          K.T.SANKARAN, J.
             ------------------------------------------------------
                       B.A. NO. 6072 OF 2009
             ------------------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 16th day of November, 2009


                                O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in

Crime No.1038 of 2009 of Karunagappally Police Station, Kollam

District.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 332 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

2.11.2009, the following order was passed:

“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 9th and 10th

November, 2009.

B.A. NO. 6072 OF 2009

:: 2 ::

Post on 13.11.2009. The petitioner shall

produce a copy of the order before the investigating

officer.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that

the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in

connection with Crime No.1038 of 2009 of Karunagappally

Police Station.”

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well

as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated

2.11.2009 has been complied with by the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that

the direction in the order dated 2.11.2009 has been complied with by

the petitioner, 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.10,000/- with two

solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer

concerned, subject to the following conditions:

B.A. NO. 6072 OF 2009

:: 3 ::

a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating
officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate
Mondays for a period of two months;

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

ahz/