Kerala High Court
S. Sivaramakrishnan vs State Of Kerala on 25 January, 2012
Author: M.Sasidharan Nambiar
Bench: M.Sasidharan Nambiar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2012/5TH MAGHA 1933
BA.No. 202 of 2012 ()
--------------------------------
(CRIME NO.1907/2011 OF CHERANALLOOR POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT)
.......
PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S):
----------------------------------------
S. SIVARAMAKRISHNAN,
50/777-L, AMRITHA KRIPA, KOSSERI LANE,
EDAPPALLY, KOCHI.
BY SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE,
BY ADV. SRI. SOJAN MICHEAL.
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
--------------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA
(CRIME NO.1907/2011 OF CHERANALLOOR POLICE STATION,
C.I.OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM TOWN NORTH POLICE STATION)
REPRESENTED BY THEPUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. R. RENJITH
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J
..................................................
B.A.No. 202 of 2012
..................................................
Dated 25th January, 2012
ORDER
Petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.1907 of 2011 of Cheranalloor Police Station registered for the offences under Section 143, 147, 144, 148, 341, 342, 365, 323, 337, 294(b), 395, 307 and 427 read with 149 of IPC. Prosecution case is that on 9.12.2011, the accused formed an unlawful assembly and in pursuance of the common object, invited the injured, the office bearers of the Nurses Association to the Hospital and took them to the room of the first accused and on the way, they were attacked, inflicting serious injuries, with an intention to cause death and thereby committed the offences. Apprehending arrest, petition is filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
3. Learned senior counsel pointed out that petitioner ba 202/12 2 joined Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences after retirement from Bharat Chemicals, a Government of India undertaking, where he worked as HRD, Manager for 25 years and is aged 72 years and is suffering from cardiac problem, Diabetes Mellitus, peripheral neuropathy, Systematic Hypertension and Osteoarthritis evidenced by Annexure I Certificate issued by the Department of Cardiology, Amrita Institute and he is not involved in the incident and he is implicated based on the allegation of conspiracy and petitioner is prepared to abide by any condition and in the event of arrest, he be released on bail. Learned senior counsel submitted that petitioner is not the HRD Manager, who is allegedly the first accused as per the F.I.Statement and he is only the General Manager of HRD, Amrita Institute and in such circumstances, he be released on bail, in the event of his arrest.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and made available the case diary and submitted that ba 202/12 3 considering the nature of the incident, the injuries sustained and the necessity for proper investigation, anticipatory bail may not be granted.
5. The case diary reveals that accused 3 to 6 were arrested and later Sessions Judge, Ernakulam released them on bail as per order dated 26.12.2011. Case diary also reveals that as per the first information furnished, the Nurses Association attempted to contact the HR Manager on 6.12.2011 and when contacted over phone, he instructed them to reach the Hospital at 12.30 pm and pursuant to the direction, they reached the Hospital and were received by the Senior Administrative Executive who took them to E- Block and while so, 15 persons gathered there and they were hiding something on their back and at that stage, proclaiming that they should be killed, they were attacked, inflicting injuries with iron rods and reepers and the first informant sustained injuries, fell down and even thereafter they attacked him and he was not allowed to move and the ba 202/12 4 attack was the result of the conspiracy entered by the management of the Amrita Hospital. Case diary also reveals the statement of the concerned injured who reached there and sustained injuries. It reveals that when they contacted the HR Manager over phone, they were informed that he is not there and revealed that he would reach there by 12.30 and asked them to reach the hospital by that time and accordingly, they reached there. If that version is true, person who informed the injured to reach the hospital cannot be the HR Manager as stated in the F.I.Statement.
6. Whatever it be, considering the nature of the offences alleged and the necessity for proper investigation, what is necessary is availability of the petitioner for the purpose of investigation and trial and also his non- interference in the investigation and avoiding fleeing from justice. If this could be taken care of, I do not find that anticipatory bail sought for is to be rejected as submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor.
ba 202/12 5
7. In such circumstances, in the event of arrest of the petitioner, after interrogation, he shall be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs.20,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer on the following conditions.
i) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on every Monday between 10 and 12 am for one month and thereafter as and when required by the Investigating Officer.
ii) Petitioner shall not induce, intimidate or threaten any person from disclosing facts known to him to the Investigating Officer or to the court or in any way tamper or attempt to tamper with the evidence.
iii)Petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the concerned learned Magistrate.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE lgk