Maniyan vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4166 of 2009()


1. MANIYAN, S/O. SADANANDAN NADAR,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. MANU,
3. SANTHOSH, S/O. THANKAPPAN NADIR,

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.S.RAJEEV

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :24/02/2010

 O R D E R
                        K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                     ---------------------------
                      B.A. No. 4166 of 2009
                 ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010

                             O R D E R

The petitioners herein state that they are accused Nos.1 to

3 in Crime No.506 of 2009 of Vizhinjam Police Station. The Bail

Application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the

3rd petitioner is not an accused in the case and petitioners 1 and

2 are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the case. In view of the

submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor, no relief is

necessary in so far as the 3rd petitioner is concerned .

3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under

Sections 341, 326 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian

Penal Code.

4. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

11/02/2010, 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,

B.A. No. 4166/2009
2

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 18th and

19th February, 2010.

Post on 24/02/2010.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor

that the petitioners will not be arrested until further

orders in connection with Crime No. 506 of 2009 of

Vizhinjam Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram.

The petitioners shall produce copy of this order

before the investigating officer.”

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the

petitioners have complied with the direction contained in the

order dated 11/02/2010.

6. 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 petitioners 1

and 2. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of

petitioners 1 and 2, the officer in charge of the police station

B.A. No. 4166/2009
3

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:

A) Petitioners 1 and 2 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) Petitioners 1 and 2 shall appear before the
investigating officer for interrogation as and
when required;

C) Petitioners 1 and 2 shall not try to influence the
prosecution witnesses or tamper with the
evidence.

D) Petitioners 1 and 2 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, in so far as it relates to petitioners 1 and 2 (accused

Nos. 1 and 2) and it is dismissed as unnecessary in so far as it

relates to petitioner No.3 (accused No.3).

K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE

scm