Bijunadhan Achari vs State Of Kerala

A. Badharudeen, J

This is a petition filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking pre-arrest bail and petitioners are accused Nos. 2, 10 and 11 in crime No.455/2023 of Pooyappally Police Station, Kollam.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant documents form part of the case diary, produced by the learned Public Prosecutor.

The case of the prosecution is that, at about 11.30 p.m. on 28.03.2023, in connection with the festival of the Keezhottu Sreedevi Temple, Oyoor, the accused stored explosive substances near the temple and the explosion of the same caused damage to window glasses of the house of one Mr.Sajeev. The specific allegation of the prosecution is that, the accused stored the explosive substances without any license or authorization with knowledge of its explosion and consequences. Precisely on these allegations, the prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Sections 289 of IPC, Section 118(e) of the Kerala Police Act, Section 9(B)(1)(b) of the Indian Explosives Act and 3(a) of the Explosive Substances Act r/w Section 34 of IPC.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, this Court granted regular bail to accused Nos. 1, 3 and 4 in this crime vide order in B.A. No.2973/2023 dated 11.04.2023. According to him, the occurrence is in connection with the festival of Keezhottu Sreedevi Temple and no fatality happened apart from breakage of window glasses of the house of Mr. Sajeev. The learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that, the petitioners are the office bearers of the temple committee and they are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Therefore, the petitioners may be released on anticipatory bail, is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The learned Public Prosecutor opposed grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that, going by the seriousness of the allegations, arrest and custodial interrogation are necessary to effectuate meaningful investigation.

Going by the relevant documents including the Mahazar, it is well established prima facie that, the explosive substances were stored in connection with the festival of the temple in an unauthorized place without any proper authentication or license. Thus, the case of the prosecution is well made out prima facie. However, the fatality is confined to breakage of window glasses of the house of Mr.Sajeev and the same is not so serious.

In consideration of the above, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail, with direction to the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and to aid the investigation.

Therefore, this petition stands allowed. The petitioners are enlarged on pre-arrest bail on conditions:

i. The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and on such surrender, the Investigating Officer can question the petitioners and record their statement, if necessary. In the event of their arrest, the Investigating Officer shall produce the petitioners before the Jurisdictional Court on the date of arrest itself.

ii. On such production, Jurisdictional Court shall release the petitioners on bail, on executing bond for Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) each, by themselves and by two sureties, each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court.

iii. The petitioners shall co-operate with investigation and shall be made available for interrogation and for the purpose of investigation, as and when the Investigating Officer directs so.

iv. The petitioners, shall not, intimidate the witnesses or interfere with the investigation in any manner.

v. The petitioners shall not commit any offence during currency of this bail and any such involvement is a reason to cancel the bail hereby granted.