High Court Kerala High Court

Mammad Kunhi vs State Of Kerala Through The on 22 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Mammad Kunhi vs State Of Kerala Through The on 22 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 1311 of 2010()


1. MAMMAD KUNHI, S/O.SEETHI, AMARKALA,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ASHRAF, S/O. MAMMAD KUNHI,AMARKALA,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :22/03/2010

 O R D E R
                       K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                     ---------------------------
                     B.A. No. 1311 of 2010
                 ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 22nd day of March, 2010

                            O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438

of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused

Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No. 53/2010 of Badiaduka Police Station,

Kasaragod District.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 324, 332 and 506(ii) read with Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

09.03.2010, the following order was passed:

“After having heard the learned counsel

for the petitioners and the learned Public

Prosecutor, I am of the view that before

disposing of the Bail Application, an

opportunity should be given to the petitioners

to appear before the investigating officer.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the

petitioners to appear before the investigating

officer at 9 A.M. on 15th and 16th March, 2010.

Post on 22.03.2010.

B.A. No. 1311 of 2010 2

It is submitted by the learned Public

Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be

arrested until further orders in connection with

Crime No.53/2010 of Badiaduka Police Station,

Kasaragod District.

The petitioners shall produce copy of this

order before the investigating officer.

Hand over copy to both sides.”

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners

and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners have

complied with the direction contained in the order dated

09.03.2010.

5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of

the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners.

There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the

petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall

release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.15,000/-

each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the

satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following

conditions:

B.A. No. 1311 of 2010 3

A) The petitioners shall report before the
investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M.
on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed
or until further orders;

B) The petitioners shall appear before the
investigating officer for interrogation as and when
required;

C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with the
evidence.

D) The petitioners 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

ln