IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 8192 of 2010()
1. BINU, AGED 32 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :20/12/2010
O R D E R
V.RAMKUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------
Bail Application No.8192 of 2010
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010
ORDER
Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime
No.1485/2010 of Nedumangad Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 447, 427 and 34 I.P.C. and Section 27
of the Arms Act, seek 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 petitioners. But at the same time, I am
inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the
Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to
have their application for bail allowed by the Magistrate or the
Court having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioners shall
B.A.No.8192/2010 2
surrender before the investigating officer on 30.12.2010 or on
31.12.2010 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 petitioners 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
petitioners 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 petitioners is
without arresting them, the petitioners 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 petitioners have been interrogated by the
police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, release the
petitioners on bail.
4. In case the petitioners while surrendering before
the Investigating Officer have deprived the investigating
officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall
B.A.No.8192/2010 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 petitioners .
5. The release of the petitioners shall be on each
the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees
fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like
amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and subject
to the following conditions:-
1. The petitioners shall report before the
Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and
11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.
2. The petitioners shall make themselves
available for interrogation including
custodial interrogation as and when
required by the Investigating Officer.
B.A.No.8192/2010 4
3. Petitioners shall not influence or
intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor
shall they attempt to tamper with the
evidence for the prosecution.
4. Petitioners shall not commit any offence
while on bail.
5. If the petitioners commit breach of any of
the above conditions, the bail granted to
them shall be liable to be cancelled.
This petition is disposed of as above.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
ln
