IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2849 of 2009 CRIME NO.219 OF 2009 OF KUMILY POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DIST. PETITIONER: ACCUSED --------------------------- JOHN JOSEPH, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. JOSEPH, VALIPLACKAL HOUSE, ANAVILASAM VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.P.P.BIJU RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 2849 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 2nd June, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.219 of 2009 of Kumily Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant filed a complaint before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Peerumed, alleging offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The crime was registered. The petitioner apprehends arrest. The accusation levelled by the de facto complainant is that he entered into an agreement with the petitioner to purchase several items of properties. A major part of the consideration was paid and the accused agreed to sell the property before 31.3.2009. The accused failed to do so. It is also alleged B.A. NO. 2849 OF 2009 :: 2 :: that the petitioner had no power of alienation in respect of some of the items. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had filed a caveat before the civil court and similarly, the de facto complainant had also filed a caveat. Prima facie, the dispute involved in the case is essentially a civil dispute. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence alleged and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail for a period of one month on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, 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; B.A. NO. 2849 OF 2009 :: 3 :: d) On the expiry of the period mentioned above, the petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail; The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/