Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945 CRIME NO.1010/2023 OF KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION,KOLLAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED: NOUSHAD AGED 50 YEARS S/O MEERASAHIB, KUNNUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KOTTIYAM P.O, THAZHUTHALA, KOLLAM., PIN - 682010 BY ADVS. S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM) S.NAVAS NAMITHA RAJESH K.VIJAYAN RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER KOTTIYAM POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV SMT.SREEJA V.-SR.PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1010/2023 of Kottiyam Police Station which was registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that on 18.06.2023 at about
10.30 hours a Bullet motorcycle bearing Registration No.KL-23-T- 3709 owned by the defacto complainant was taken away from the custody of her brother named Ansar by the petitioner. The crime was registered in such circumstances and as the petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with the investigation of the said case this application for anticipatory bail is submitted.
3. Heard Sri.S.Sreekumar (Kollam), learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Sreeja V., learned Public Prosecutor for the State.
4. The specific contention put forward by the learned
counsel for the petitioner is that, Ansar, the brother of the defacto complainant and the petitioner were friends. The said Ansar made the petitioner believe that his wife is a cancer patient and for her treatment he is in urgent requirement of money. By believing his word, the petitioner arranged an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) from another person and handed over the same to Ansar but, he did not repay the said amount and he evaded the payment with lame excuses. Later, when the said amount was demanded by the petitioner from Ansar, he handed over the said motorcycle to the petitioner as a security to the said money transaction. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was keeping the said vehicle, as the same was entrusted to him by the said Ansar and the allegation of theft is false. The anticipatory bail was sought in such circumstances.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the said
application. However, it is pointed out that there was some monetary transactions between the petitioner and the said Ansar. It is further pointed out that the recovery of the vehicle is already affected. It is reported that the petitioner is not involved in any other cases.
6. I have gone through the records. It is an undisputed fact that there were certain money transactions between the parties. No criminal antecedents were brought to my notice. Taking note of the
facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that, the
contention put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be simply brushed aside. Anyhow, it is a matter for investigation. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner, particularly because the motorcycle is already recovered. The interest of justice would be served if the cooperation of the petitioner with the investigation is ensured. Accordingly, this application is disposed of on the following conditions: i) The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer, within a period of two weeks from today, for subjecting himself to interrogation. ii) After interrogation, the petitioner shall be released on bail on the very same day of surrender upon the petitioner executing a bond for Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. iii) The petitioner shall fully co-operate with the investigation, including subjecting himself to the deemed police custody for the purpose of recovery, if any, as and when demanded.
iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer between 10.00 a.m and 11.00 a.m every Saturday until the filing of the final report. v) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required. vi) The petitioner shall not commit any offence of similar nature while on bail. vii) The petitioner shall not make any attempt to contact any
of the prosecution witnesses, directly or through any other person, or in any other way try to tamper with the evidence or influence any witnesses or other persons related to the investigation. viii) The petitioner shall not leave India without the permission of the Jurisdictional Court. In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation of bail, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs