IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2010 / 25TH SRAVANA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3475 of 2010() ------------------------------------ CRMP.1330/2010 of DIST & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO. 341/2010 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ---------------------------- K.A.GEORGE @ JOY, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.EBRAHAM, KIDANGEDATHU VEEDU, CANAL WARD, ARYAD SOUTH VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANU SRI.S.K.PREMRAJ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY THROUGH THE SUB- INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA. (NOTICE TO WHOM MAY BE SERVED ON THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM). BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3475 of 2010 ----------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner induced de facto complainant to pay Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) by making false representation that he would obtain a visa through his son, but no visa was arranged and no job was procured and hence, the complaint was filed by alleging the above said offence. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that no transaction took place as alleged. Petitioner and de facto complainant are running fruit stalls in the vegetable market and petitioner did not receive any amount from de facto complainant for arranging visa. Petitioner owes some money to de facto complainant and there was some quarrel in respect of the same. Because of that, a false complaint is foisted alleging that some amount was received for arranging visa. Petitioner was given an opportunity to appear before the investigating officer and explained his innocence. Petitioner appeared before the B.A. No. 3475 / 2010 2 investigating officer as per the direction of this court and he was questioned by the police. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as directed by this court, petitioner appeared before the investigating officer and he was interrogated and he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail on the conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: 1. Petitioner shall, in the event of his arrest be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 10,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the 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 and co-operate with the investigation. ii). Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate any witness. B.A. No. 3475 / 2010 3 2). This order will be in force only for a period of 30 days from today. In the meantime, petitioner shall seek regular bail from the court concerned in accordance with law. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln