IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2010 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2101 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ CRIME NO.479/10 OF KOLLAM EAST PLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2 -------------------------------------------------- 1. ANSAR A.M., S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, THOPPIL VEEDU, MULLUVILA, VADAKKEVILA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. A.R.SURESAN, EDAVILAKAM, ORUMA NAGAR HOUSE NO.38, THATTAMALA P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. V. TEK CHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sou. K. HEMA, J ---------------------- B.A.No.2101 OF 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under section sections 420, 468, 471 r/w 34 IPC. According to prosecution, defacto complainant was approached by petitioners and false representations were made to him that Visa would be arranged and thereby, he was induced to part with Rs.60,000/- and thereafter, no proper visa was arranged and money was also not returned. However, a fake visa was given to defacto complainant and thereby, he was cheated. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that first accused took a loan of Rs.40,000/- and defacto complainant stood as surety for the amount received by first accused. Since first accused defaulted the payment , the amount was recovered from the salary of defacto complainant, who is an Arabic teacher. He pressurized first accused to return money to him. He also tried to get it realised fom defacto complainant with the help of police. B.A. No.2101/10 2 Twice he approached the police and petitioner apprehended arrest. Hence, petitioner moved the court for anticipatory bail . On both occasions, it was represented that no crime was registered against petitioner, first accused and there is no intention to arrest. Therefore, those petitions were dismissed. Annexure A-1 is the order dated 16.2.2010 in one such petitions. 4. Since defacto complainant could not realise the amount from first accused despite all the move, a new tactics is being adopted now by by filing a false complaint. A crime was also registered including non -bailable offences. It is unlikely that while there was a dispute between the parties in respect of return of Rs.40,000/- which Petitioner could not return due to financial stringency, defacto complainant would pay Rs.60,000/- to petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner also submitted that Petitioner is prepared to abide by any condition and that he is also prepared to pay Rs.20,000/- to defacto complainant towards the amount which is due to hm within one month from today. 5. On hearing both sides and on consideration of the facts and circumstances of this case I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted on conditions. Hence the following order is passed: B.A. No.2101/10 3 Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned, within seven days from today and he shall be released on bail, on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent securities each for the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Magistrate on the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with investigation. ii) First accused shall deposit Rs.20,000/- before the Magistrate court within one month from today and such amount, if deposited, shall be paid to the defacto complainant. This condition is applicable only to the first accused. iii) In case first accused does not surrender and pay the amount within the time stipulated as directed, this petition shall be treated as dismissed as far as first petitioner is concerned. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Sou.