Kerala High Court
G. Anandakrishnan vs State Of Kerala on 25 October, 2018
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940
Bail Appl..No. 6921 of 2018
CRIME NO. 145/CR/2007 OF CBCID, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
G. ANANDAKRISHNAN,
AGED 37 YEARS,
S/O.V.S.GOVINDARAJAN, A-3, RESERVE BANK OFFICERS
QUARTERS, OPP. AC MARKET, TARDEO ROAD, TULSIWADI,
MUMBAI- 400034.
BY ADVS.
SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR
SRI.JAYAN JOHN
SRI.K.G.PRAMOD KUMAR
SMT.S.HRIDYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM -682031.
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
CBCID, AW-1, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
CBCID, HHW-1, JAWAHAR NAGAR, KOWDIAR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -
SRI C N PRABHAKARAN, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No. 6921 of 2018 2
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The applicant herein is the 1st accused in Crime No.145/CR/2007 of the CBCID, Thiruvananthapuram, registered under Sections 342 and 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The applicant was working as a member of the special squad of TTE's in the Southern Railway. On 09.06.2007, one Santhosh along with his co-workers boarded Jayanthi Janatha Express, from Neyyattinkara. Santhosh was not having a valid ticket for his travel. He was apprehended by the TTE's and he was detained for the purpose of imposing penalty. While so, Santhosh jumped from the train while it was passing between Murukkumpuzha and Kadakkavoor in order to escape from the TTE's. His dead body was found in the lake at Idinjimoola Bridge near Murukkumpuzha on the next day. Necropsy was conducted and it revealed that he had died due to the combined effects of the injuries sustained on his head and drowning. Investigation was Bail Appl..No. 6921 of 2018 3 conducted and a refer report was laid before the jurisdictional court categorizing it as accidental death. A protest complaint was later filed by a social activist against the refer report. The learned Magistrate after considering the facts and circumstances rejected the final report and directed the investigating agency to conduct further investigation. The case was investigated by the DySP, Analysis Wing-1, CBCID and it was concluded that the applicant herein and one Abdul Khader were the persons who had detained the aforesaid Santhosh Kumar for traveling without a ticket. Investigation was completed and final report was laid before the jurisdictional Court under sections 341, 304 r/w section 34 of the IPC.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the incident had taken place in the year 2007. The prosecution has no case that the applicant herein had assaulted the deceased or that he had pushed him down. The applicant was merely doing his duty and he had no occasion to assume that the deceased would jump out of the train. the applicant was summoned by the investigating officer on numerous occasions and he has been cooperating with the investigation. According to the learned Bail Appl..No. 6921 of 2018 4 counsel , the applicant is now working as Assistant General Manager in the Reserve Bank of India and prays that he be spared from the rigors of custodial interrogation.
5. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor who submitted that the prosecution has no case that the applicant or any other person had used any violence. It would be enough if the applicant is directed to cooperate with the investigation, submits the learned public prosecutor.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced and gone through the materials on record. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I do not think that the custodial interrogation of the applicant herein is required in the instant case. I am of the view that by imposing necessary conditions to ensure the presence of the applicant herein, he can be granted an order of pre-arrest bail.
7. In the result, this application will stand allowed. The applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and shall undergo interrogation. Thereafter, if he is proposed to be arrested, he shall be released on bail on his Bail Appl..No. 6921 of 2018 5 executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum. The above order shall be subject to the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when he is called upon to do so.
ii) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/ her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
iii) He shall not commit any similar offence while on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions, the jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider the application for cancellation, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE DSV/-