High Court Kerala High Court

Prasad vs State Of Kerala on 11 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Prasad vs State Of Kerala on 11 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 128 of 2010()


1. PRASAD, AGED 57 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :11/03/2010

 O R D E R
                      K.T. SANKARAN, J.
                    ---------------------------
                     B.A. No. 128 of 2010
                ------------------------------------
            Dated this the 11th 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 petitioner is

accused No.1 in Crime No. 148/2009 of Nooranadu Excise

Range, Alappuzha District.

2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under

Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

24.02.2010, the following order was passed:

“After having heard the learned counsel

for the petitioner and the learned Public

Prosecutor, I am of the view that before

disposing of the Bail Application, an

opportunity should be given to the petitioner

to appear before the investigating officer.

Accordingly, there will be a direction to the

petitioner to appear before the investigating

officer at 9 A.M. on 04th and 05th March,

2010. The petitioner shall produce a copy of

the order before the investigating officer.

B.A. No. 128/2010 2

Post on 11.03.2010.

It is submitted by the learned Public

Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be

arrested until further orders in connection with

Crime No.148/2009 of Nooranadu Excise

Range, Alappuzha District.

Hand over copy to both sides.”

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

and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner has complied

with the direction contained in the order dated 24.02.2010.

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 petitioner.

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

petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release

him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent

sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer

concerned, subject to the following conditions:

A) The petitioner 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.A. No. 128/2010 3

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

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

D) The petitioner 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