IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 8730 of 2010()
1. RAJESH, S/O.RAJAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :07/01/2011
O R D E R
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
.........................................
B.A. No. 8730 of 2010
..........................................
Dated: 7-01-2011
ORDER
Petitioner who is the first accused in Cruime No. 1337 of
2003 of Kayamkulam Police Station for offences punishable under
Sections 294 (b), 452, 506 (2), 427 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. seeks
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 petitioner. But at the same time, I am inclined to
permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for
the purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for bail
allowed by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating
officer on 17-01-2011 or on 18-01-2011 for the purpose of
B.A.No. 8730/2010 -:2:-
interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case
the investigating officer is of the view that having regard to the facts
of the case arrest of the petitioner 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 petitioner
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 petitioner is without arresting him, the
petitioner 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 petitioner has been interrogated by the
police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, release the
petitioner on bail.
4. In case the petitioner while surrendering before the
Investigating Officer has 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 accused .
5. The release of the petitioner shall be on the petitioner
executing a bond for `. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with
B.A.No. 8730/2010 -:3:-
two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Court concerned and subject to the following conditions:-
1. The petitioner shall report before the Investigating
Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.
2. The petitioner shall make himself available for
interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when
required by the Investigating Officer.
3. Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate the
prosecution witnesses nor shall he attempt to tamper with the
evidence for the prosecution.
4. Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
5. If the petitioner commits breach of any of the above
conditions, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be
cancelled.
This petition is disposed of as above.
Dated this the 7th day of January, 2011.
Sd/-V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
ani/ /true copy/
P.S. to Judge