Kerala High Court
Chandrasekharan vs State Of Kerala on 12 March, 2014
Author: Thomas P.Joseph
Bench: Thomas P.Joseph
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/21ST PHALGUNA, 1935
Bail Appl..No. 1734 of 2014 (B)
-------------------------------------------
[CRIME NO. 164/2014 OF KOVALAM POLICE STATION]
..........
PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------------
CHANDRASEKHARAN,
S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, AGED 47 YEARS,
T.C 20/39(6) VISHNU BHAVAN,
SASTHA NAGAR, MELARANNOOR WARD,
THYCAUD VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER (KARAKONAM).
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. SREEJITH.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Prv.
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J
---------------------------------------
B.A.No.1734 of 2014
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of March, 2014
ORDER
Petitioner is the 4th accused in Crime No.164 of 2014 of the Kovalam Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 411 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.
2. Case is that accused Nos. 1 and 2 committed theft of 6 new and 8 old vehicular batteries from the workshop of the de facto complainant and the same were sold to the 3rd accused. The petitioner purchased some old batteries from the third accused. It is also pointed out that the petitioner is involved in 4 other cases for purchase of stolen articles.
3. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is engaged in purchase of scraps and even the allegation in F.I.R is that the petitioner purchased batteries from the shop of the 3rd accused. Petitioner had no information that the batteries are stolen properties. It is also submitted that other cases are registered against the petitioner in quick succession.
4. It is revealed that the batteries are recovered. In the circumstances, I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions. B.A.No.1734 of 2014 2
Application is allowed as under:
(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No.164 of 2014 of the Kovalam Police Station on 19.03.2014 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 petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply.
(iii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case.
(iv) In case arrest of the petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
(v) On such production, the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties 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 the petitioner.
(b) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case on every alternate Saturday between 03.00 p.m and B.A.No.1734 of 2014 3
05.00 p.m for a period of two months or until filing of the final report, whichever is earlier.
(c) Petitioner shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for interrogation.
(d) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(e) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(vi) In case the petitioners violates any of condition Nos.
(b) to (e), it is open to the investigating officer to move the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).
Sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
AS /True Copy/
P.A. to Judge