IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5246 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.513/2009 OF KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION PETITIONERS: ACCUSED ------------------------------------- 1. SUNNY T.V., S/O. VAREED, THALKODAN HOUSE, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR. 2. C.A. MUHARY, S/O. ABDUL REHMAN, CHEENIKA PARAMBIL HOUSE, ARIYAMPADOM, MUNDATHIKODE, THALAPPALLY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE STATE OF KERALA THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNAMKULAM POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5246 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 ORDER 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.513 of 2009 of Kunnamkulam Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 406, 418, 420 and 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Public Prosecutor and also perused the case diary. 4. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class - Kunnamkulam which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was registered. A perusal of the complaint would disclose that the defacto complainant and the accused persons were partners of a firm and there are disputes relating to the conduct of business in BA No.5246/2009 2 the partnership. It is submitted that civil suits are also pending between the parties. 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.25,000/- 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 appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners 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