BINEESH JOSEPH Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners who are accused Nos. 2 and 1 respectively in Crime No. 103/05 of Thiruvambadi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 and 468 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. , seek anticipatory bail.

(2.) As per Annexure I order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kozhikode, in an application filed by the petitioners for anticipatory bail it is ordered that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and the petitioners were directed to surrender before the Magistrate within two weeks and seek regular bail. But during the said period of two weeks, the petitioners were virtually granted anticipatory bail. The grievance of the petitioners is that they were not arrested during the said period of two weeks and the learned Magistrate does not construe the order passed by the Sessions Judge to be one granting anticipatory bail.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that the petitioners can be granted anticipatory bail but on appropriate conditions safeguarding the interest of the prosecution. Bail A.No. 7359 of 2006 -:2:-