Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3, in Crime No.1563 of 2014 of the Aluva East Police Station for the offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 148, 506(i), 212, 448, 323, 324, 452, 308 and 120B r/w Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehend arrest and have filed this application.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application.
It is submitted that the petitioner and others were engaged in reclaiming paddy land and that was objected by the de facto complainant and others. On 18.04.2014 at about 3.45p.m while the de facto complainant and others were sitting in the library of the SNDP union, the petitioners and hired goons trespassed into the said library and assaulted the de facto complainant and two others with iron rod. The articles in the library were damaged.
3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations are not true. Chathamkulam Projects had obtained permission from the authorities concerned for construction of building on the land in question. On the relevant day the de facto complainant and others even as per their version came there, objected to the construction work and deflated tyres of vehicle. According to the learned counsel, they even damaged the JCB causing huge loss. Learned counsel submits that some of the accused who were arrested were released on bail by the learned Sessions Judge. In the said order it is observed that only one person sustained some minor injuries while the two others did not suffer any external injury. According to the learned counsel, due to political pressure the offence under Sec.308 of the Indian Penal Code is incorporated.
4. I have gone through the wound certificates of the de facto complainant and find that the learned Sessions Judge was correct in the observations made (in the order granting bail) concerning the injury.
5 . Having regard to the relevant circumstances, I am inclined to grant relief to the petitioners but conditionally. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are willing to co- operate with the investigation and produce the weapons allegedly used in the incident.
Resultantly this application is allowed as under:
(i) Petitioners shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.1563 of 2014 of the Aluva East Police Station on 06.06.2014 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 petitioners on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioners shall comply.
(iii) Petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
(iv) In case arrest of the petitioners is recorded, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
(v) On such production the petitioners shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for `25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with two sureties each 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 a close relative of any of the petitioners.
(b) Each of the petitioners shall deposit `10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) in a Nationalised Bank for a period of two years (renewable as per the order of the learned magistrate) and produce the Fixed Deposit receipts before the learned magistrate while executing the bail bonds.
(c) In case the petitioners are made liable to pay compensation, such compensation to the extent possible could be realised from the amount in deposit.
(d) Petitioners shall report to the officer investigating Crime No.1563 of 2014 of the Aluva East Police Station on all alternate Saturdays between 10a.m and 12p.m for a period of two months or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
(e) Petitioners shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for interrogation.
(f) Petitioners shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(g) Petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(h) In case the petitioners violate any of condition Nos.(d) to (g), it is open to the investigating officer to move the learned magistrate until committal of the case if any, and thereafter before the learned Principal Sessions Judge concerned, for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K Shaji Vs. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).
(i) It is directed that in case the weapons (allegedly) used are not seized/recovered due to non-co- operation of the petitioners, this order granting pre-arrest bail would cease to be effective in which case it is open to the petitioners to request for regular bail before the learned magistrate which the learned magistrate shall consider having regard to all relevant circumstances and pass orders as per the law.
Sbna True Copy Sd/-
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.
P A to Judge