Judgment · High Court · 2006

J.M.JAMES, J.--------------B.A. 4702/2006------------------DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2006O R D E RThe petitioner is accused of the offencepunishable under Sections 397 and 354 IPC, as he isalleged to have snatched away the gold chain, belongingto the defacto complainant, a woman, while she waswalking along the public road at 2.00 p.m on 5.6.2006.At her instance, Kundara Police registered crimeNo.510/2006 against the petitioner. He hadsurrendered before the Court below, on 16.6.2006. 2.It is submitted by the learned counsel thatthe police sought the custody of the petitioner and hehad been interrogated, accordingly. The petitionerremains in judicial custody from 16.6.2006, as hisearlier bail application had been rejected. Hence thesecond application is preferred, under Section 439Cr.P.C. 3.When the application came up for B.A.4702/20062consideration, the learned counsel submitted that thepetitioner and the defacto complainant are neighboursand they knew each other. The counsel, therefore, expressed surprise on the way in which, theallegations are made against the petitioner that athirty five year old person, who attempted to snatchthe gold chain of a woman, whom he knew for long, and being neighbours, attempted to outrage hermodesty at a public place. The learned counseltherefore, submitted that this is a fully false case, registered at the instance of extraneous forces, andthe second crime allegedly registered is also with anulterior motive. These are all the contentions, whichthe accused may make at the time of the trial. 4.Therefore, without expressing any opinionon the merit of the matter, I grant bail and release thepetitioner from jail, subject to the following condition:-(a).The petitioner shall execute a bondfor Rs.20,000/-, with two solvent B.A.4702/20063sureties, each for the like sum, to thesatisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate ofFirst Class-I, Kollam. The application is allowed as above.J.M.JAMESmrcsJUDGE