IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3777 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.178/2007 OF KATTAKADA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.1 ----------------------------- ANCHOR DAEWOO INDUSTRIES LTD, MARATHON INNOVA, OFF G.K.MARG, OPPOSITE PENINSULA CORPORATE PARK LOWER PAREL (W), MUMBAI, REP. BY MR.DINESH KESHER DEO PODDAR, S/O.KESHAR DEO PODDAR, AGED 44 YEARS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV. SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR) RESPONDENT: COMPLAINT ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA , REP. BY SUB INSOEXCTOR OF POLICE, KATTAKADA POLICE STATION, REP. BY THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3777 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is the first accused in the crime registered under Sections 420 and 34 IPC on a private complaint filed against him and others. According to the prosecution, the petitioner company supplied sub-standard materials to the defacto complainant firm and caused wrongful loss to the defacto complainant and committed various offences. The defacto complainant was a dealer of M/s.Anchor Daewoo Industries which is the manufacturer of home appliances. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was a transaction between the petitioner and the defacto complainant and the latter owed more than Rs.4 lakhs to the petitioner company. A cheque was given in connection with the transaction and it was dishonoured and hence, a complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and a copy of the complaint is produced as Annexure A2. The defacto complainant filed the complaint as counter blast and the said BA 3777/08 2 case, it is submitted. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the petitioner may be available for interrogation since his interrogation is necessary because huge amount of money is involved. Petitioner is now in Korea and the learned counsel for the petitioner requests sufficient time for the petitioner to appear before the Investigating officer. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that a suitable direction can be issued in the matter and the following order is passed: (i) The petitioner is directed to appear before the Investigating officer within 30 days from today and make himself available for interrogation. (ii) 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 the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will co-operate with the investigation and report for interrogation as and when directed by the police. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl