IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2160 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NUMBER NOT KNOWN PETITIONER : SUSPECTED ACCUSED ---------------------------------- RAJKUMAR SIVASUBRAMANIAM, AGED 48 YEARS S/O.SIVASUBRAMANIAM, 'AVANTHIKA', NO.10 MATHER VILLA, KINGS BROOKE, MARADU-4, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.MANOJ B.MENON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CENTRAL POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 2160 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 O R D E R Application anticipatory bail. The petitioner has come to this court complaining that no crime has been registered to his knowledge against him. He apprehends arrest. According to him, pressurised tactics are exerted by the complainant influencing the police. 2. The learned Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that a crime has been registered as Crime No.624 of 2008 of Central Police Station, Ernakulam, on the basis of a complaint filed by the complainant before the I.G. of Police, which complaint has been forwarded to the local police station by the I.G. to register a crime and take necessary action. 2. The crux of the allegations is that the defacto complainant runs a financial institution. The first accused is the Manager of the said Institution at Ernakulam. The second accused is a customer of the said branch. The complainant had B.A.No. 2160 of 2008 2 allegedly issued travelers cheques to a company in Coimbatore on the promise of the petitioner/A2 to pay the amounts due in that transaction. He issued a cheque for the discharge of the said liability. That cheque had bounced. There is a further allegation that while the said transaction was not through, the complainant was induced to advance a loan of Rs.35,000 U.S. dollors to the petitioner himself. For the discharge of the said liability also a cheque has been issued by the petitioner to the company, which cheque also has bounced. Because of the earlier incident the principals verified the details and had come to know that there is no amount in the account to honour the cheque. It is in these circumstances that the present allegations have been raised. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. Even if the entire allegations were accepted in toto, there is nothing to indicate culpability at all. At worst the petitioner can be said to have committed breach of a civil obligation to repay the amount to the defacto complainant, or if the statutory time table is followed culpable indiscretion under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. No other offence is committed and the attempt is only to B.A.No. 2160 of 2008 3 somehow compel and coerce the petitioner and extract amounts for settlement of the civil claim. The car of the petitioner is illegally detained in the police station. As a matter of fact, on a settlement of the account, it will be seen that amounts are due to the petitioner and not in the other way, submits the counsel. 4. After discussions at the Bar, the learned Prosecutor only submits that appropriate conditions may be imposed. 5. Having considered all the details, to which I have made brief reference above, I am satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. Appropriate conditions can, of course, be imposed to ensure the interests of a fair and proper investigation. 6. In the result: (1) This application is allowed. (2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (a) The petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on 11.4.2008 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioner on regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for B.A.No. 2160 of 2008 4 Rs.1.00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (b) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. on 15.4.2008 and 16.4.2008. During this period, the investigators shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps in connection with the investigation. Thereafter he shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of two months and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. (d) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 11.4.08 and the police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law. (e) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 11.4.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released on B.A.No. 2160 of 2008 5 bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any surety undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 11.4.2008. (R. BASANT) Judge tm