Petitioner is the 2nd accused in Crime No.665 of 2014 of the Parippally Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 308 read with Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application. His earlier application, B.A. No.2877 of 2014 was disallowed by this Court as per order dated 09.05.2014. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. Allegation is that on 29.03.2014 at 3.30 p.m., the petitioner and others attacked the de facto complainant and others near the canteen of the College It is seen that to the 3rd accused, this Court has granted relief as per order dated 28.05.2014 in B.A. No.3099 of 2014.
4. Though the earlier application filed by the petitioner was rejected, in the light of the order dated 28.05.2014 in B.A. No.3099 of 2014 and considering nature of allegations made against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioner.
Application is allowed as under:
(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No.665 of 2014 of the Parippally Police Station on 18.06.2014 at 10 a.m for interrogation.
(ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply.
(iii) In case arrest of the petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
(iv) On such production, the petitioner shall be released on bail, (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:
(a) One of the sureties shall be father/mother of the petitioner.
(b) Petitioner shall deposit of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) in a Nationalized Bank in his name initially for a period of two years (renewable as per order of the learned magistrate) and produce the FD receipt before the learned magistrate while executing the bail bond.
(c) In case the case is decided against the petitioner and he is made liable to pay compensation, such compensation could be realized from the amount in deposit to the extent possible.
(d) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation.
(e) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(v) It is made clear that in case any of condition Nos. (d) to (f) is violated, it is open to the Investigating Officer to seek cancellation of the bail granted hereby by moving application before the learned magistrate (until committal of the case if any, and thereafter before the learned Principal Sessions Judge concerned) as held in P.K. Shaji V. State of Kerala (AIR 2006
Supreme Court 100).
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
vsv