High Court Kerala High Court

S.U.Noushad vs State Of Kerala on 29 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
S.U.Noushad vs State Of Kerala on 29 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 1508 of 2010()


1. S.U.NOUSHAD, AGED 46 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ASHIK K.MOHAMMED ALI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :29/03/2010

 O R D E R
                         K.T.SANKARAN, J.
            ------------------------------------------------------
                      B.A. NO. 1508 OF 2010
            ------------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 29th 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 the second

accused in Crime No.1251 of 2009 of Fort Kochi Police Station,

Ernakulam District.

2. The offences alleged against the accused are under

Sections 403, 408 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

17.3.2010, 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 AM on 23rd and 24th

March, 2010.

B.A. NO. 1508 OF 2010

:: 2 ::

Post on 29/03/2010.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor

that the petitioner will not be arrested until further

orders in connection with Crime No.1251 of 2009 of

Fort Kochi Police Station.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order

before the investigating officer.”

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

well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order

dated 17.3.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that

the direction in the order dated 17.3.2010 has been complied with

by the petitioner, 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:

B.A. NO. 1508 OF 2010

:: 3 ::

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

b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution
witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in
any prejudicial activity while on bail;

d) 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

ahz/