IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 5717 of 2008()
1. JOY CHACKO,
... Petitioner
2. SAJI CHACKO,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.S.RAJEEV
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :14/11/2008
O R D E R
K. HEMA, J.
---------------------------------------------------
Bail Appl.No. 5717 of 2008
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of November, 2008.
ORDER
Petition for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 20(b) (ii)
of the NDPS Act and Section 27 (i)(e)(iii) of the Kerala Forest Act.
According to prosecution, A1 to A6 were found in the forest and
A1 was found in possession of 1.490 kgs. of ganja. Except A2
and A4, other accused were arrested from the spot on 14.7.2008
and ganja was also seized. The persons who allegedly ran away
are petitioners (A2 and A4).
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that
petitioners are brothers and they are absolutely innocent of the
allegations made. They are falsely implicated at the instance of
first accused with ulterior motive. The 2nd petitioner was not even
present at the place of incident on on the alleged date of
occurrence. He was attending a marriage which took place in the
Sub Registrars’ office, Rajakumari on the date and time of
incident. Annexure A1 is a copy of the marriage agreement in
which petitioner has signed as a witness on the same day at Sub
Registrar Office, Rajakumari. The place of occurrence is 200 kms.
away from the Sub Registrar’s office.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners further submitted
that 2nd accused owed an amount of Rs.23,000/- to first accused
[B.A.No.5717/08] 2
and he demanded the money back while there was a quarrel and
the first accused gave a complaint to the Mandalam Committee
stating that 2nd accused had assaulted him. The matter was
settled under the mediation of the President of Congress
Mandalam Committee at Committee office. An agreement was
also executed on the said date. Rs.3000/- was given to the first
accused consequent to the settlement on the very same day.
Annexure-2 is the complaint given by first accused against 2nd
accused before the Committee and Annexure-3 the copy of
settlement. The balance amount is yet to be given. In the light of
this incident, petitioner deliberately implicated the 2nd accused
and his brother in this offence.
5. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor
submitted that the incident was witnessed by various officials and
they had seen the accused running away. Their names are
mentioned in the mahazar.(Learned counsel for petitioners
submitted that it is written in the mahazar that the names of 2nd
and 4th accused were given by A3).
6. On hearing both sides, considering the rival
contentions and on perusal of the documents, I am satisfied that
petitioners have a strong and arguable case, which can be
established only at the time of evidence. If petitioners are not
granted anticipatory bail, it is likely that great injustice will be
caused to them.
Hence, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be
granted to petitioners on conditions. Hence, the following order is
passed:
[B.A.No.5717/08] 3
1) Petitioners shall surrender before the investigating
officer within 7 days from today and make
themselves available for interrogation and co-
operate with the investigation.
2) In the event of arrest, they shall be released on
bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each
with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to
the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the
following conditions:
i) Petitioners shall report before the
investigating officer as and when directed.
ii) Petitioners shall not influence or intimidate
any witness or commit any offence while
on bail.
Petition is allowed.
K. HEMA, JUDGE.
Krs.