IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6927 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRMP.5720/2008 of J.M.F.C.,THIRUVALLA CRIME NO.631/2008 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PETITIONER (S): 2ND ACCUSED: -------------------------------- G.SANTHOSH KUMAR @ SARAVANAN, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN ACHARI, KOKKADAYIL, PULIYOOR, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I.OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6927 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 406, 415 and 420 read with section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner (A2) and his brother (A1) are goldsmiths. De facto complainant who is a jeweler used to give gold bars and gold for making gold ornaments to petitioners. They received 150 grams of 24 carrots gold and 40 grams of gold bars. But, they failed to make the ornaments or return the gold and thereby, they misappropriated the gold belonging to de facto complainant and cheated him. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that originally a complaint was given by de facto complainant before the police. Petitioner was called to police station and interrogated in the presence of his mother. On knowing that petitioner is innocent, no action was taken against petitioner. Subsequently, a private complaint was filed (vide Anneuxre-A) against petitioner and his brother and now petitioner is apprehending arrest, since a crime was registered on the basis of a private complaint. As per the allegations in the complaint, particularly in paragraph 2, petitioner has no specific role in the offence. It is vaguely alleged BA 6927/08 -2- that 1st accused has absconded with knowledge of petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that anticipatory bail may be granted to petitioner. I am satisfied that suitable directions can be passed in this case. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner may be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer and subject to that, he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to petitioner. 5. Hence, the following order is passed:- (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and he shall be released on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each, for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, on the following conditions:- i) Petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when directed. ii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with BA 6927/08 -3- evidence or commit any offence while on bail. iii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.