These are applications for bail filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

2.

The petitioners are accused 1 & 2 in Crime No. 252 of

2019 of Chengannur Police Station registered for the offence under

Section 394 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The

prosecution case is that on 05.02.2019 at 9.45 pm, while the

defacto complainant was proceeding to his house in a motor cycle,

the accused persons intercepted the defacto complainant and

thereafter, the first accused sprinkled chilly powder on the face of

the defacto complainant and pushed him down and thereafter, they

snatched away the gold chain of the defacto complainant having a

weight of 8.5 sovereign worth Rs.1,80,000/-.

3.

Heard both sides.

4.

The petitioners were arrested on 07.02.2019 and since

then, they have been in judicial custody. The petitioner in BA No.

2850/2019 filed CMP No.765/2019 before the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Chengannur. The above application was

..4..

dismissed on 01.03.2019. Subsequently, he approached this Court

as per BA No.2335/2019 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn.

The learned counsel for the petitioner in BA No. 2850/2019 submits

that initially the investigation proceeded under Section 392 IPC and

the Bail Application was dismissed as withdrawn to complete the

statutory period of detention.

5.

The petitioner in BA No. 2969 of 2019 filed CMP No.784

of 2019 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I,

Chengannur and the same was dismissed on 01.03.2019. The

petitioner approached this Court seeking regular bail as per BA

No.1685 of 2019, but the same was dismissed on 13.03.2019,

finding that the investigation is in the initial stage and the

investigation has to be made as to whether the petitioner is

involved in any other criminal case considering the nature of the

allegations against the petitioner. He again preferred another

application seeking regular bail as BA No.2227/2019 before this

Court. When the Bail Application came up for consideration on

08.04.2019, the learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions,

submitted that the offence alleged against accused 1 & 2 is under

Section 392 r/w Section 34 IPC and the petitioner as well as the

other accused are entitled for statutory bail, as 60 days would be

over by 08.04.2019. As stated earlier, on the said reasons, the

..5..

petitioner in BA No. 2969/2019 was constrained to withdraw the

application in order to approach the jurisdictional magistrate to

claim statutory bail.

6.

The petitioners have moved the jurisdictional magistrate

seeking statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., but the said

applications were dismissed by the learned magistrate holding that

the offence alleged against both the accused is under Section 394

IPC.

7.

The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits

that the offence mentioned in Crime No. 252/2019 of Chengannur

Police Station is under Section 394 r/w Section 34 IPC and the

investigation is proceeding for the said offence only.

8.

In this case, the petitioners were arrested on

07.02.2019 and they have been in judicial custody since then.

Considering the fact that the petitioners have been in judicial

custody for a considerable period, this Court is of the view that bail

can be extended to the petitioners on stringent conditions.

Having considered these facts, I am inclined to grant bail to

the petitioners herein subject to the following conditions:-

(i)

Petitioners shall execute bond for a sum of

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) each

with two sureties for the like sum to the

..6..

satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. One of

the sureties shall be a close relative of the

petitioners, either parents or siblings.

(ii)

The petitioners shall appear before the

Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. and 11

a.m. on all Mondays and Thursdays for a

period of three months after being released on

bail.

(iii)

They shall not threaten,