Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Tomy K.J

High Court Of Kerala|19 June, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Petitioners who are accused Nos.2 and 1 respectively in Crime No.196 of 2014 of the Ernakulam Town North Police Station, seek pre-arrest bail. 2.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the de facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. After hearing both sides I had, on 02.04.2014 issued interim order directing the petitioners to appear before the officer investigating the case and the investigating officer to release the petitioners on bail for a limited period so that a investigation could be done in the meantime. Accordingly, the petitioners appeared before the investigating officer and they were released for the period directed by this Court.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor has handed over to me a report of the investigating officer where result of investigation is stated.
5. Learned counsel for the de facto complainant says that the said view of the investigating officer is not correct. He asserts truth of the allegations contained in the complaint.
6. At this stage and in this proceeding, I am not required to make any opinion concerning the truth or otherwise of the allegations made by the de facto complainant and findings of the investigating officer. Those are matters to be considered by the Court concerned. I leave the matter to that court.
7. On hearing both sides and having regard to the relevance circumstances including the present stage of investigation I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required. Hence, I am inclined to grant subject to conditions.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that while this Court granted interim relief, it was directed that the petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the goods covered by Annexure-A1. It is requested that the said condition may be lifted.
9. Learned counsel for the de facto complainant has objected to lifting the said condition on the ground that the goods belonged to the de facto complainant. On this question also, I need not enter into any finding since that may be a matter is required to be investigated by the investigating officer.
In the circumstances, the application is allowed of as under :
I Petitioners are granted bail in Crime No.196 of 2014 of the Ernakulam Town North Police Station. Petitioners shall surrender before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (EO) on or before 28.06.2014.
2. On such surrender, the petitioners shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on their executing bond for `20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court and subject to the following conditions:
a. Petitioners shall file affidavit before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court while executing the bail bond detailing the immovable properties they own and undertaking that they will not dispose of or encumber the said properties until culmination of the proceedings before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court or until otherwise ordered by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court (EO).
b. Petitioners shall file an attested copy of the said affidavit before the Registrar concerned within two weeks from the date of their release on bail.
c. Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
d. Petitioners shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for interrogation.
e. Petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
f. In case any of condition Nos.(b) to (e) is violated, it is open to the investigating officer to file application before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court for cancellation of the bail granted hereby, as held in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [AIR 2006 SC 100] The Interim order will cease to be effective on execution of the bail bond as aforesaid.
It is also directed that in case the petitioners do not surrender before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate within the time granted, this order will cease to be effective on the expiry of time granted hereby.
AMV Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Tomy K.J

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
19 June, 2014
Judges
  • Thomas P Joseph