This is an application filed by the second accused in Crime No. 460 of 2014 of Badiadka Police Station for regular bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for short). 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on 21.09.2014, the accused were found to be in possession of a country made gun, which was brought by the first accused and handed over to the second accused without any documents and thereby both of them committed offence punishable under Section 3 r/w 25(1) (a) of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence. The petitioner is falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of statement given by the first accused and no article was seized from his possession and he is in jail from 22.09.2014 onwards.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that investigation of the case is not over.
5. Heard both sides and perused the Case Diary file.
6. It is seen from the Case Diary that the above case was registered when the Badiaduka Police had seized the country made gun from the first accused and when he was interrogated, it was revealed that he has brought it from Karnataka to be handed over to the second accused, who is the petitioner herein and it is on that basis the above crime was registered against two accused persons including the present petitioner alleging commission of the above said offence. The petitioner was arrested on 22.09.2014 and he is in jail from that day onwards. The alleged weapon has already been recovered. Further, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that no article was seized from his possession and he has been implicated in the case only on the basis of statement given by the first accused. I am not at this stage, going to the question as to whether that will be sufficient to rope in the petitioner for the commission of the offence or not as it is a matter to be considered by the trial court. However, the custody of the petitioner is not required and investigation is almost complete
7. So, considering the circumstances of the case, this Court feels that bail can be granted to the petitioner with some stringent conditions.
The application is allowed with the following conditions.
1. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kasaragod.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9.00 a.m and 10.00 a.m, for a period of three months and thereafter on the last Saturday of every month between the same timings till final report is filed.
3. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation as and when required in connection with the above crime in writing to do so till final report is filed.
4. The petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
5. The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime of similar nature during the period of bail.
6. The petitioner shall surrender his passport if any before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kasaragod within one week from the date of his release on bail and if he does not have the same, file an affidavit to that effect before the Court below within the time mentioned above.
7. The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without getting prior permission either from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Kasaragod or from the Court to which, the case will be committed for trial till the disposal of the case.
With the above conditions, this application is allowed.
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, Judge lsn