IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2008 / 30TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4396 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.527/2007 OF KOYILANDY POLICE STATION ) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO 1 & 2:- ---------------------------------------------- 1. K.P.S. JAYAN,AGED 49 YEARS, S/O SIVA SANKARAN NAIR, SREE LAKSHMI, OLARI DESOM, PULLAZHI VILLAGE, THRISSUR. 2. MURALIDHARAN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O BHASKARAN, CHIRANGARA PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, P.O. AIRAPURAM, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.B.PRAJITH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------- 1. STATE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOILANDY POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO 527 OF 2007), KOILANDY. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.NARAYANAN NAIR FOR ADDL.R. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. -------------------------------------- Bail Application No.4396 of 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 120(B) of IPC. According to the prosecution, the first petitioner was engaged in a business in exporting and importing of gold ornaments. The defacto complainant was engaged in purchasing gold and manufacture of ornaments and thereafter, he supplied the same to various business concerns. On 15.10.2003, an agreement was executed between the defacto complainant and the first petitioner that gold ornaments will be imported by the petitioner on the guarantee given by the defacto complainant for Rs.20 lakhs before the Bank. It was also agreed that after one year, the amount will be paid by the first petitioner and the documents will be redeemed from the Bank. On these terms, the property of the defacto complainant having an extent of 2 acre 17 cents were mortgaged before the Canara Bank main branch. Various other properties were also mortgaged as guarantee. But the documents were not BA 4396/08 2 redeemed in spite of expiry of the period. On enquiry, it is understood that instead of Rs.20 lakhs, the petitioners have fraudulently raised an amount of Rs.1 Crore 14 lakhs by creating false documents in collusion with the Bank officials. A complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant before the police based on which a crime was registered. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there are civil suits between the petitioners and the defacto complainant relating to money transactions. The present complaint is lodged only with a view to pressurise the petitioners to settle the civil dispute, it is submitted. It is pointed out that when there was an apprehension of arrest on the basis of a complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, first petitioner moved B.A.No.3384/2007 before this Court and it was submitted by learned public prosecutor that no crime was registered against the petitioner and that he was only summoned in connection with an enquiry in a petition filed by the defacto complainant. Anticipatory bail application was disposed of and the defacto complainant withdrew that petition. Subsequently, the present complaint is lodged with a view to harass the petitioner with the BA 4396/08 3 help of the police, it is submitted. 4. On hearing both sides, it appears that as per the allegations, the bank officials have created false documents by obtaining the petitioners signature from various documents for raising Rs.1 crore 14 lakhs as against Rs.20 lakhs which the defacto complainant had agreed to raise. It also appears that this is an offshoot of a series of civil disputes and violation of an agreement executed between the parties. I heard the learned counsel for the defacto complainant and the learned public prosecutor also. Counsel for the defacto complainant submitted that there are materials to incriminate the petitioner and in case, if bail is granted, the petitioners will leave the country and they will not be available for trial. In such circumstances, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: (1) The petitioners shall surrender before the Investigating officer within seven days from today and make themselves available for interrogation. (2) Thereafter, in the event of arrest of the petitioners, if BA 4396/08 4 any, they shall be produced before the Magistrate court concerned in accordance with law. (3) On production of the petitioners before the Magistrate court concerned, they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.50,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate court on the following conditions: (i) The petitioners shall report before the Investigating officer as and when directed. (ii) The petitioners shall co-operate with the investigation. (iii) The petitioners shall not leave the Kerala State except with the prior permission of the learned Magistrate. (iv) The petitioners shall surrender before the passport, if any, before the Magistrate court concerned within seven days from release of the petitioners on bail. (v) The petitioners shall not tamper with evidence influence or threaten any witness while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl