Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Adv.Sri.C.Unnikrishnan (Kollam) on 14 February, 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
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 25TH MAGHA, 1939
Bail Appl..No. 622 of 2018
--------------------------
CRIME NO. 1712/2017 OF PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM
------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3
-----------------------
SUNI T.S.,
S/O.T.SANKARAN, AGED 33 YEARS,
SANTHI BHAVAN THADATHIL HOUSE,
EDAPPAL P.O., MALAPPURAM.
BY ADV.SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM)
RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:
-------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
PALARIVATTOM POLICE STATION,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682025.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI SAJJU.S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-02-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K.V.
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J
--------------------------------------------
B.A No.622 of 2018
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of February, 2018
ORDER
1.This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2.The petitioner herein is the 3 rd accused in Crime No.1712 of 2017 of Palarivattom Police Station, registered alleging offence punishable under Sections 383 r/w Sec.511 of the IPC.
3.The de facto complainant is a movie artist. On 11.9.2017, he and his associates had conducted a show in connection with the Onam celebrations. Among other programs, one Arun had performed a snake dance with live snakes. This came to the notice of Forest Officials and he was contacted by a Forest Officer on the same day itself. He was later called from the Wild Life Office at Kakkanad. Later, on 18.10.2017, he was called by a person by name Suni and he had introduced himself as a Crime Branch Officer. He was asked to conduct a program in his family temple. When he objected, he was threatened with initiation of prosecution proceedings. After some time, he received a missed call and when he returned the call, the same was answered by an Advocate. He was told that the offence that he had committed attracted imprisonment upto seven B.A No.622 of 2018 2 years and he was asked to come to Palarivattom junction for negotiation. As suggested by him, he went there and he was taken near to an isolated building. There he was joined by another person. He was told that if a sum of Rs.10 lakhs is not paid, prosecution proceedings would be initiated and he would be put behind bars. Immediately thereafter, he approached the police and gave a statement based on which the aforesaid Crime was registered.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is working as a Constable in the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, Ernakulam, and is on deputation from the C.R.P.F. It was at the instance of his superior officers that the petitioner had called up the de facto complainant as he was the man behind the conduct of a stage show with snakes, which is prohibited. It is further submitted that the main allegations are levelled against accused Nos. 2 and 3, who have already been arrested and have been released.
5.The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. It is submitted that the 2nd accused had called up the informant based on the information given by the petitioner herein.
6.I have considered the submissions advanced and have gone through the case diary. The allegation of attempt to extort B.A No.622 of 2018 3 money from the de facto complainant is made against accused Nos. 2 and 3, who have already been arrested. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had made a call to the de facto complainant. The informant has no case that the petitioner had met him or had an occasion to interact with him other than through phone as alleged.
7.In that view of the matter, it does not appear to me that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessitous for an effective investigation.
In the result, this petition will stand allowed. However, it shall be subject to the following conditions:
i). The petitioner shall appear before the investigation 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 executing a bond for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum.
ii)The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m., for one month or till final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
iii)The petitioner 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.
B.A No.622 of 2018 4
iv)The petitioner 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 //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE AD