The two petitioners herein are the accused Nos. 1 & 2 respectively in Crime No.1097/2014 of Vilappilsala Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram District registered for offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 506(ii), 447, 323, 354 r/w Section 34 IPC. The 2nd petitioner is the nephew of the 1st petitioner. The gist of the allegation in the aforementioned crime is that due to previous enmity with the 1st petitioner (A1) had towards the complainant for her having given complaint before the police against him, accused Nos.1 to 4 with a common intention trespassed into her property and abused her using filthy language against her and accused Nos.1 to 4 on 5.10.2014 at about 1:30 pm further assaulted her and accused No.1 pushed the complainant whereupon she fell down in to the drainage and Accused No.2 twisted her in the neck and also attacked her mother and brother and A1 to A4 together used abusing words and thereby committed the aforementioned offences. Sri.Suman Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would submit that the allegations are falsely foisted against the petitioners due to the previous enmity with the defacto complainant. The 1st petitioner's son who is having three cents property near to their ancestral property, who is in military service, wanted a compound wall to be constructed in the property nearby the property owned by the defacto complainant herein whereupon she objected to it and the 1st petitioner pacified her stating that when his son come the matter can be sort out and later on 5.10.2014, the defacto complainant, her son and some other gundas came to the house of the petitioner and assaulted him, his wife and his daughter which led to the registration of Annexure-A Crime No.1095/2014 of Vilappilsala Police Station for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 294(b), 452, 323, 354, 506(ii), 427 r/w 34 IPC. Annexure-B is the mahazar evidencing destruction caused to the 1st petitioner’s house in respect of the aforementioned crime and Annexures C & D are the discharge slip showing the treatment details suffered by the 1st petitioner's and his daughter respectively relating to the aforementioned incident and as a counter blast to the said crime in Annexure-A as early as on 6.10.2014, that the instant crime has been triggered at the instance of the defacto complainant herein. It is further submitted that no injuries or wounds are involved in the investigation details collected so far in the instant crime and it is accordingly prayed in the interest of justice the plea of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners may be granted subject to any condition that may be imposed by this Court.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted about the details of registration of the crime and he has also fairly submitted about the details in respect of Annexure-A, which is Crime No.1095/2014 registered at the instance of the 1st petitioner herein. The learned Public Prosecutor also would fairly submit that the investigation does not disclose any wound or injury being suffered by the defacto complainant herein. He would further submit that in case this Court is inclined to allow the plea of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners then the same should be placed with necessary safeguards so as to protect the interest of prosecution.
3. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor and on an evaluation of the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is inclined to grant the relief of pre- arrest bail to the petitioners, but, subject to strict conditions so as to protect the bonafide interest of the prosecution. Accordingly, it is ordered that in the event of the petitioners being arrested in connection with Crime.No.1097/2014 of Vilappilsala Police Station, then they shall be released on bail on their executing a bond for ` 35,000/- (Rupees Thirtyfive Thousand only) each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer concerned in the aforementioned crime. This order will be subject to the following conditions:-
i) The petitioners shall surrender their passport, if any, before the jurisdictional Magistrate concerned within three days from execution of the bail bond before the investigating officer concerned and if either of them are not holders of passports, then they shall file affidavit to that effect in the said court. If the petitioners require their passport in connection with their travel abroad, then they are free to approach the court concerned for the release of the same and for necessary permission in that regard. In case if 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, reported in 2009 (2) KLT 712, notwithstanding the aforementioned conditions imposed by this Court.
(ii) The petitioners shall not involve in any criminal offence of similar nature.
(iii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation and report before the investigating officer as and when required.
(iv) The petitioners shall not influence the witnesses or shall not tamper or attempt to tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.
If the petitioners fail to comply with any of the conditions as ordered above, the bail granted to them are liable to be cancelled.
bkn/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.