BINESH C CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners seek anticipatory bail on the allegation that Konni Police are at their heels in connection with Crime No.63/2007 registered for an offence punishable under Section 394 IPC in respect of a motorcycle.

(2.) The petitioners in B.A.880/2007 claim to be the Assistant Manager and Collection Co-ordinator respectively of a Financier, who had financed the loan to the defacto complainant. In B.A.916/2007, both petitioners claim to be the Assistant Managers of the Financier. According to the petitioners, consequent on the default committed by the defacto complainant in the re-payment of the loan, the Motorcycle was re-possessed by the Financier strictly in accordance with the terms of the contract.

(3.) The learned public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the first petitioner in B.A.880/2007 is the first accused in the case and other two accused persons were described as identifiable by sight. He also submitted that it is only after the interrogation of the first accused, can the Investigating Agency come to a conclusion as to whether the other petitioners are to be arrayed as accused or not.