IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 8498 of 2010()
1. HEMANTH.M., AGED 19 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. SREEGITH, AGED 30 YEARS,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :03/01/2011
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
------------------------------------------------
Bail Application No.8498 of 2010
------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011
ORDER
Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 & 5 in Crime No.1326
of 2010 of Parippally Police Station for offences punishable
under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 326 & 427 read with
Section 149 I.P.C., 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
(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 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
B.A.No. 8498/2010
-:2:-
for bail considered by the Magistrate or the Court having
jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before
the investigating officer on 12/01/2011 or on 13/01/2011 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
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 are
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, consider and dispose of
their application for regular bail preferably on the same
date on which it is filed.
B.A.No. 8498/2010
-:3:-
4. In case the petitioners while surrendering before
the Investigating Officer have deprived the investigating
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 petitioners .
This petition is disposed of as above.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
skj