IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3733 of 2008() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.1248/2008 OF ALUVA POLICE STATION. .... PETITIONER/ACCUSED ------------------- AHAMMED PILLAI YUSUF @ YUSUF SULTHAN, AGED 63, S/O. AHAMMED PILLAI (LATE), KALARICKAL HOUSE, KIZHAKKE DESOM, ALUVA, PIN-683 103, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ----------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY S.I. OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------- B.A. No.3733 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008. O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The crime is registered under Sections 406, 420 and 506(1) of Indian Penal Code on a complaint filed by the de facto complainant against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a non-bailable offence and hence this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a non-resident Indian who is having business abroad and he is doing religious activities in India, like preaching etc. He is also running educational institutions, hospital etc. and he is a Chairman of the Trust. The de facto complainant was his servant from 2002 to 2005. He was expelled in 2005. The de facto complainant thereafter filed a false complaint against the petitioner making allegations without any basis on the allegation that the petitioner owes more than Rs.8 lakhs to him and that he had promised the de facto complainant to give a share in the property. It is also stated that documents are executed by the petitioner in connection with this. B.A. No.3733/08 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that though search was conducted in the house of the petitioner, no document was traced out which has some connection with the crime. But, investigation is at the preliminary stage and the petitioner will be required for interrogation. 5. On hearing both sides, it is clear that the de facto complainant has not so far produced any document before the police to support his claim. The capacity of the de facto complainant to raise such huge money is also to be investigated into. No recovery could be effected of any document which would necessarily be in existence. Going by the allegations of the complainant, the complainant must be in possession of the documents. He could not produce any documents. It is also to be noted that the de facto complainant was silent for the past three years and there is inordinate delay in filing the complaint. In the above circumstances, I find that suitable directions have to be given and an order is passed as follows: 1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within a period of ten days from today and B.A. No.3733/08 3 make himself available for interrogation, and co-operate with the investigation. 2) If the petitioner is arrested, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, on the following terms and conditions: i) Petitioner shall not leave India except with the previous permission of the Magistrate court concerned. ii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by him. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. smp