Prasad Thomas Mathew v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/18TH PHALGUNA, 1936 Bail Appl.No. 1142 of 2015 ------------------------------------ CRIME NO.2/15/SIU.1 OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, SIU.1, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BEFORE THE COURT OF ENQUIRY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ........
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED (A3 & A4):
----------------------------------------------------
1. PRASAD THOMAS MATHEW, AGED 48 YEARS, MANKOOTTATHIL, KUMARAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 2.
2. SISI P. THOMAS, AGED 43 YEARS, MANKOOTTATHIL, KUMARAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 2 BY ADV. SRI.R.T. PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SREEJITH V.S.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: msv/
B.KEMAL PASHA, J.
============================ B.A. No.1142 of 2015 ============================= Dated this the 9th day of March, 2015
O R D E R
Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. According to the petitioners they are apprehending arrest in connection with Vigilance Case No.02/15/SIU-1.
3. It is alleged that the petitioners had obtained a building permit for the construction of a building, without submitting No Objection Certificate from the Airport Authority of India, which was a mandatory requirement. It is alleged that the officers of the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram had granted the permit without the production of the No Objection Certificate from the Airport Authority of India.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned Public Prosecutor has produced a report from the investigating officer, which reveals that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required in the matter and there is no objection for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Matters being so, this is a fit case wherein
B.A. No.1142 of 2015 anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. In the result, this bail application is allowed and the investigating officer or such other police officer, who is conducting the arrest of the petitioners, is directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest on each of them executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the officer conducting arrest, and subject to the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer in between 09.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. on all Mondays and Thursdays commencing from 16.03.2015 for a period of three months or till the filing of the final report in this case, whichever is earlier.
(ii) The petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.
(iii) The petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation as and when required by the investigating officer.
B.A. No.1142 of 2015 (iv) The petitioners shall not involve in any offence while on bail.
It is made clear that the violation of any of the conditions stipulated above will result in the cancellation of bail. Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA JUDGE DSV/9/3/15 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge