IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6667 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.536/08 OF PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED ------------------------------ HARIKRISHNAN T., S/O.RAMACHANDRA PANICKER, AGED 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT THATHWAMASI, HOUSE NO.26/273, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.N.RETHEESH SRI.SUMA RETHEESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6667 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. According to prosecution, petitioner (A6) and other accused conspired to cheat defacto complainant, and in furtherance of common intention, A1 procured sale deed of the property belonging to defacto complainant under the pretext of raising some money for defacto complainant who was in need of money, but, instead of getting a mortgage deed executed, made the defacto complainant to execute sale deed in respect of the same property in favour of second and third accused and thereafter, a loan was raised pledging the property and the accused obtained Rs.1 lakh. On coming to know of commission of offence, defacto complainant lodged a complaint before the police. Since, no action was taken by police, a private complaint was filed before the Magistrate court which was forwarded under Section 156(3) Crl.P.C. and a crime was registered. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that as per BA No.6667/2008 2 the allegations in the complaint, the role of sixth accused is very limited. He only introduced first accused to defacto complainant. There is no allegation that he conspired to commit any offence. There is nothing in the complaint to show that petitioner, who is the sixth accused, shared any common intention with other accused to commit offence, it is submitted. The role of petitioner is totally different from other accused and even the defacto complainant has not implicated petitioner as an accused and the complaint was filed only against A1 to A4. Because of political reasons, petitioner has been dragged into this case and included in the array of accused, it is submitted. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. Subject to that, he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner and hence, the following order is passed: (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and co-operate BA No.6667/2008 3 with the investigation. (2) In the event of his arrest, petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the following conditions: (i) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. (ii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. (ii) Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence, influence or intimidate any witness or commit any offence while on bail. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl