Sarun P.Joy. Vs. State of KeralA. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

[mr.justice b.v.pinto, j.] this crl.a filed u/s.374(2) cr.p.c. by the advocate for the appellant against the judgment dt. 14.7.05 passed by the dist. & sj., fast track court ii, shimoga, in s.c.no,71/02 -convicting the appellant/accused for the offence p/u/s.326 of ipc and sentencing him to undergo s.i. for 5 years and to pay a fine of rs.3000/- i.d., s.i. for 6 months for the offence p/u/s.326 of ipc......498(a), 323, 324, 506(i) and 34 i.p.c., seek anticipatory bail. 2. the learned public prosecutor opposed the application. 3. after evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the apex court in siddharam satlingappa mhetre v. state of maharashtra and others (crl.appeal no. 2271 of 2010), i am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioners. but at the same time, i am inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the investigating officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have their application for bail allowed by the magistrate or the court having jurisdiction. accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer on 30.12.2010 or on 31.12.2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. in case the investigating officer is of the view that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the petitioners is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest in the case diary as.....

Judgment:

1. Petitioners, who are accused Nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.1123/2010 of Kunnikode Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 324, 506(i) and 34 I.P.C., seek anticipatory bail.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application.

3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122 of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (Crl.Appeal No. 2271 of 2010), I am of the view that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating the petitioners. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have their application for bail allowed by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioners shall surrender before the investigating officer on 30.12.2010 or on 31.12.2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. In case the investigating officer is of the view that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the petitioners is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest in the case diary as insisted in paragraph 129 of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre's case (supra). The petitioners shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail. In case the interrogation of the petitioners is without arresting them, the petitioners shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate or the Court concerned and apply for regular bail. The Magistrate or the Court on being satisfied that the petitioners have been interrogated by the police shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, release the petitioners on bail.

4. In case the petitioners while surrendering before the Investigating Officer have deprived the investigating officer sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient time was not available after the production or appearance of the petitioners .

5. The release of the petitioners shall be on each the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and subject to the following conditions:-

1. The petitioners shall report before the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. on all Wednesdays.

2. The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation including custodial interrogation as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

3. Petitioners shall not influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses nor shall they attempt to tamper with the evidence for the prosecution.

4. Petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail.

5. If the petitioners commit breach of any of the above conditions, the bail granted to them shall be liable to be cancelled.