IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 122 of 2011()
1. RAHIMAN @ ABDUL RATHIMAN,
... Petitioner
2. ARAFATH, AGED 21 YEARS,
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :14/01/2011
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
.........................................
B.A. No. 122 of 2011
..........................................
Dated: 14-01-2011
ORDER
Petitioners who are accused Nos. 9 and 10 in Crime No.
458 of 2009 of Bekal Police Station, for offences punishable under
Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 308, 323, and 153 A read with Sec. 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 for bail
allowed by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating
officer on 24-01-2011 or on 25-01-2011 for the purpose of
interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case
B.A.No. 122 of 2011 -:2:-
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 is 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, release the petitioners
on bail.
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 .
5. The release of the petitioners shall be on each of the
petitioners executing a bond for `. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen
thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount
to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and subject to the
B.A.No. 122 of 2011 -:3:-
following conditions:-
1. The petitioners shall report before the Investigating
Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.
2. The petitioners shall make themselves available for
interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when
required by the Investigating Officer.
3. Petitioners shall not influence or intimidate the
prosecution witnesses nor shall they attempt to tamper with the
evidence for the prosecution.
4. Petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.
5. If the petitioners commit breach of any of the above
conditions, the bail granted to them shall be liable to be
cancelled.
This petition is disposed of as above.
Dated this the 14th day of January, 2011.
Sd/-V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
ani/ /true copy/
P.S. to Judge