IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 809 of 2010 C.C.NO.65 OF 2008 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF THE FIRST CLASS I, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ MUTHUMALAISWAMY THEVAR @ AYYA THEVAR, S/O.KUMAR THEVAR, AGED 71 YEARS,THOTTANAMPATTI, PERAYYOOR, MADURAI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU SRI.A.MUHAMMED RAFFI RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 809 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in C.C.No.65 of 2008, on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class I, Punalur. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The case was initiated on a complaint before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class I, Punalur. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and the case was numbered as C.C.No.65 of 2008. It is stated that in spite of the issuance of summons, the petitioner did not appear before Court. He could be arrested only on 2.2.2010 in execution of a warrant issued by the Court. He was remanded to judicial custody. B.A. NO. 809 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 4. The case of the complainant is that the first accused offered a loan of Rs.50 lakhs to the complainant and that a sum of Rs.9,20,000/- was collected from the complainant under the pretext that it was necessary for meeting the expenses. As promised, the loan was not granted and the amount taken from the complainant was not repaid. 5. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application for bail filed by the petitioner as per the order dated 3.2.2010, on the ground that if the petitioner is released on bail, he would not be present in Court and that it would not be possible to secure his presence. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is aged 71 years and that he is a heart patient. Annexure 4 medical certificate dated 13.11.2009 issued by Bala Hospital, Usilampatti is produced in support of the contention. The learned counsel submitted that persons who own immovable properties in the State of Kerala can be offered as sureties as a condition for granting bail. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the B.A. NO. 809 OF 2010 :: 3 :: case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the age and physical condition of the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner. 8. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties, who own immovable properties in the State of Kerala, for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class -I, Punalur, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed as above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/