Petitioner who is the accused in Crime No.1718 of 2014 of North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam district, registered for offences under Sections 323, 347 and 354 of Indian Penal Code. has approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as he apprehends arrest in connection with that crime. 2. The gist of the prosecution allegation is that the accused had trespassed in to the compound of the lady de facto complainant's house and manhandled her husband and when she attempted to rescue her husband, the petitioner pulled down and manhandled her and tried to outrage her modesty. The alleged incident was taken place on 09.09.2014 at about 10:30 p.m.
3. Sri.Mansoor B.H, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the case has been falsely foisted against the petitioner. Petitioner would also submit that he had taken a loan of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) from the husband of the de facto complainant and the same was not repaid, as the husband of the de facto complainant was demanding exorbitant interest and that there arose serious dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant's husband and the offences now alleged is only to implicate the petitioner in the above crime.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the investigation is almost complete and that in case this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, petitioner shall be directed to undertake before this Court that the petitioner shall not in any manner harass or intimidate the de facto complainant, her husband and other members of the family, if any, as the rival parties are living in the same immediate neighbourhood.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submitted that the allegations in the aforementioned crime are falsely foisted and the petitioner would undertake that he will not in any manner interfere with the de facto complainant, her husband and family and that strict conditions in that regard may be ordered by this Court.
6. After having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and after having evaluating the totality of the facts and circumstances in this case, I am inclined to hold that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner, but, with sufficient safeguards so as to protect the interest of the prosecution.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner in connection with Crime No.1718 of 2014 of North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam district, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.35,000/- (Rupees Thirty Five Thousand Only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer in the aforementioned crime, and subject to the following conditions:
i) The petitioner shall not repeat incidents of the nature mentioned in the aforementioned crime, disturb or commit any offence in any manner to disturb peaceful living of the de facto complainant, her husband and family or commit any offence against any of them. This direction is issued as the petitioner is living in the immediate neighbourhood of the de facto complainant. In case any such untoward incident is committed at the instance of the petitioner, then, the Investigating Officer shall make an appropriate application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.
ii) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, before the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within three days from the execution of the bail bond before the Investigating Officer and if he is not a holder of passport, he shall file an affidavit to that effect in the said court. If the petitioner requires his passport in connection with his travel abroad, then he shall approach the court concerned for the release of the same and for necessary permission in that regard. In case such an application is filed, the trial court or the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned, as the case may be, is free to consider the same on merits and to pass appropriate orders thereon, taking necessary guidance from the principles laid down in the decision of this Court in the case Asok Kumar v State of Kerala, (2009(2) KLT 712), notwithstanding the aforementioned conditions imposed by this Court.
iii) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer in Crime No.1718 of 2014 of North Paravur Police Station, Ernakulam district between 10 a.m and 11 a.m on every alternate Sundays till such period as may be required by the Investigating Officer.
iv) The petitioner shall not involve in any criminal offence of similar nature.
v) The petitioner shall not influence the witnesses or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.
vi) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation and report before the Investigating Officer as and when required by him.
If there is any violation of any of the aforementioned conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall stand cancelled.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
Vdv //True Copy// P.A to Judge