High Court Kerala High Court

Santhosh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 7 February, 2008

Kerala High Court
Santhosh Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 7 February, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 709 of 2008()


1. SANTHOSH KUMAR, S/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NAVEEN BABU, S/O.JAYABAL

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.  K.SHAJ

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :07/02/2008

 O R D E R
                                  R.BASANT, J

                           ------------------------------------

                             B.A.No.709 of 2008

                           -------------------------------------

                Dated this the 7th day of February, 2008



                                       ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioners are accused 2

and 3. Altogether there are 4 accused persons. The crux of the

allegations is that the petitioners, who are employees of a new

generation bank, had forcibly dispossessed the defacto

complainant of a vehicle in respect of which a financial

arrangement has been availed from the said bank. Crime has

been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioners

apprehend imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

the petitioners had not committed any offence and that they are

willing to co-operate with the investigator. They are willing to

produce the vehicle before the investigator as and when directed

by this Court, submits the learned counsel for the petitioners.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the

application, but only submits that appropriate conditions may be

imposed in the interests of a fair, efficient and expeditious

investigation.

B.A.No.709 of 2008 2

4. I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to

the petitioners. In the absence of opposition, it is not necessary

for me to advert to facts in any greater detail in this order.

Appropriate conditions can of course be imposed in the interests

of a proper investigation.

5. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The

following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

a) The petitioners shall produce the vehicle before the

Investigating Officer on or before 14.02.08;

b) The petitioners shall appear before the learned

Magistrate at 11 a.m on 15.02.08. They shall be enlarged on

regular bail on condition that

i) The petitioners satisfy the learned Magistrate that

condition (a) above has been satisfied;

ii) They execute bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like

sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate;

c) The petitioners shall make themselves available for

interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and

B.A.No.709 of 2008 3

3 p.m on 16.02.08 and 17.02.08 and thereafter as and when

directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so;

d) If the petitioners do not appear before the learned

Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to

arrest the petitioners and deal with them in accordance with law

as if those directions were not issued at all;

e) If the petitioners were arrested prior to their surrender

on 15.02.08 as directed in clause (1) above, they shall be

released from custody on their executing a bond for Rs.50,000/-

(Rupees Fifty thousand only) each without any sureties

undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15.02.08.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-