IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2011 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8786 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.146/2011 OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION, WAYANAD PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- P.MANOHARAN, SARANG ASSOCIATES, 2ND FLOOR, B.B.BUILDINGS, KOTTOOLI JUNCTION, MAVOOR ROAD, CALICUT-6. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN SRI.I.V.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA (S.H.O. OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION), REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.RENJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.8786 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2011 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 sole accused in Crime No.146 of 2011 of Meppadi Police Station, Wayanad District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 403, 406, 409, 420, 427 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant is a lawyer by profession. The petitioner is the surveyor deputed by an Insurance Company. The de facto complainant had a grievance that the television purchased by him was having manufacturing defect. The television was subject to insurance. The allegation is that the petitioner directed the de facto complainant to bring the television to Kozhikode. The de facto complainant brought the BA 8786/11 2 television to Kozhikode. Thereafter, without permission of the de facto complainant, the television was delivered to the manufacturer for repair and it was not disclosed to the de facto complainant. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. 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 petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for ` 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) 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 ; BA 8786/11 3 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 to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl