IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2010 / 23TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6755 of 2009() ----------------------------------------- (CL.NO.1969/2008 OF JFCM, JAMSHEDPUR) ...... PETITIONER:ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- CHITHARANJAN T.K., AGED 45 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, UNITEK SOFTWARE (P) LTD., 1ST FLOOR, CITY TOWER, BANK JUNCTION, ALUVA. BY ADVS. MR.SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR, MR.BENNY ANTONY PAREL. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR, OF POLICE, ALUVA POLICE STATION, SUB JAIL ROAD. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6755 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of January, 2010 O R D E R Apprehending arrest in execution of the non bailable warrant issued by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Jamshedpur against the petitioner, he has filed this application for Anticipatory Bail. 2. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 16.11.2009, the following order was passed: “It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that non bailable warrant was issued by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Jamshedpur in C.L.No.1969 of 2008 against the petitioner. The petitioner apprehends arrest in execution of the warrant. Therefore, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner intends to take appropriate proceedings before the learned Magistrate at Jamshedpur or before the High Court of Jharkhand. The only request made by the petitioner is to grant a breathing time to resort to appropriate legal remedies. B.A. No. 6755 of 2009 2 In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the second respondent not to arrest the petitioner in connection with C.L.No.1969 of 2008 on the file of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Jamshedpur for a period of one month. Post after one month.” 3. On 23rd December, 2009, it was submitted that further time was required for the petitioner to move the Court for appropriate reliefs. Accordingly, an order was passed on that day. The order reads as follows: “ The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though all arrangements were made to move for appropriate reliefs as recorded in the order dated 16.11.2009, the petitioner got certified copy of the complaint only now. It is stated that the courts will be closed for Christmas holidays from 24th December, 2009 onwards and that the courts will be reopened in the first week of January, 2010. The only prayer made by the petitioner is to extend the direction not to arrest the petitioner for a short time to enable the petitioner to move the court for appropriate reliefs. B.A. No. 6755 of 2009 3 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the direction not to arrest the petitioner as mentioned in the order dated 16th November, 2009 is extended till 10th January, 2010. It is made clear that no further extension of time will be granted.” No further direction is necessary in the case. Accordingly, the Bail Application is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln