IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4616 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 395/2009 OF MEDICAL COLEGE POLICE STATION KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- 1. V. SURENDRAN, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O. APPU, RESIDING AT NELLIKODE AMSOM, DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. V. SIVADASAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. APPU, VAZHAYIL HOUSE, MELE NADANGAL PARAMBA, NELLIKODE AMSOM, DESOM OF KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI. R. SUDHISH & SRI .P.P. BALAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. GIKKU JACOB PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4616 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.395/2009 of Medical College Police Station, Kozhikode. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 420 and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kunnamangalam against the petitioners and two children of the first accused. The complaint was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The crime was accordingly registered. 4. The gist of the allegations made by the defacto complainant is the following: The defacto complainant is a dealer of Kerala, Bhuttan and Sikkim Lotteries. The accused persons were appointed as agents B.A. No. 4616 of 2009 2 of the defacto complainant for selling lottery tickets. The tickets were given on credit to the accused. The agreement between the parties was that unsold tickets shall be returned to the defafcto complainant and the accounts shall be submitted twice in a week and also before the date of draw of the lottery. Contrary to the terms of the agreement, the accused persons submitted prized tickets directly to the mega distributor and received the prize money. Later, realizing that the petitioner was the dealer in respect of those prized tickets, the petitioner had to pay the prize money and penalty to the mega dealer in terms of the agreement between the mega dealer and the defacto complainant. The complaint does not disclose any written agreement and no written agreement was produced along with the complaint. The questions to be inquired into would depend upon the terms of the agreement between the parties. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case involves disputed questions of fact and those questions are to be decided only by a Civil Court. In answer, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the learned Magistrate has forwarded the complaint to the police under Section 156(3) of B.A. No. 4616 of 2009 3 the Code of Criminal Procedure and the police, in compliance with the directions, are investigating the crime. 5. It is not necessary to decide, while disposing of this application for Anticipatory Bail, the rival contentions put forward by the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Any such finding or decision would cause prejudice either to the accused or to the prosecution. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.50,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; B.A. No. 4616 of 2009 4 C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln