High Court Kerala High Court

S. Anirudhan vs State Of Kerala on 9 July, 2008

Kerala High Court
S. Anirudhan vs State Of Kerala on 9 July, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4032 of 2008()


1. S. ANIRUDHAN, PROPRIETOR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE S.I OF POLICE, VARKALA POLICE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.VAKKOM N.VIJAYAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :09/07/2008

 O R D E R
                            K.HEMA, J.
                 --------------------------------------
                  Bail Application No.4032 of 2008
                 ---------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 9th day of July, 2008


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under Sections 143, 147,

149, 365, 373, 506(1), 342, 465 and 330 of IPC. According to

the prosecution, the alleged victim is a former employee who

worked in the Medical Shop of the second accused. On the

allegation that he committed misappropriation of about Rs.3

lakhs from the Medical Shop, he was abducted by the petitioner’s

son who is the first accused and four others and he was brought

to Kaikkara. From there, the alleged victim was questioned by

other persons and he was asked to return the money. The

petitioner was allegedly present on the scene and he also asked

the person to return the money and he also beat him with hand.

Thereafter, he was taken to the house of the second accused and

the victim’s parents were called to the place and victim was

handed over to them on the next day. These are the allegations

in short.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

BA No.4032/08 2

going by the allegations in the First Information Statement, the

petitioner has not taken part in abduction. The petitioner is

totally innocent of the allegations made and he has not taken

part in the offence, it is submitted. But, he is implicated only

because he is the owner of the shop.

On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the petitioner can

be granted anticipatory bail and the following order is passed:

(i) Petitioner is directed to surrender before the

Investigating officer from the date of this order and

make himself available for interrogation.

(ii) Thereafter, in the event of the arrest of the petitioner,

if any, he shall be released on bail on his executing

bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting

officer on condition that he will co-operate with the

investigation and report before the Investigating

officer as and when directed.

The petition is allowed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl