IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, 5TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 16TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7544 of 2008() ----------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.318/08 OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION) APPLICANTS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- 1. DINACHANDRA, S/O.BHASKARAN, L.I.C.AGENT, KOPPULLY PARAMBIL, EDATHIRINJI DESOM, EDATHIRINJI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 2. ANITHAKSHAN, S/O.VELUKUTTY, VALLOOPARAMBIL, EDATHIRINJI DESOM, EDATHIRINJI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.MADHAVAN, THAKARAMKUNNATH, PADIYOOR DESOM, PADIYOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 4. VARGHESE, S/O.ETTUMANNOOKARAN THOMAS, CHELUR DESOM, MANAVALLASSERY VILLAGE, MANAVALLASSERY, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 5. SANJAY KUMAR, S/O.SARADAMMA, KURIKKATTIL, EDAKKULM DESOM, POOMANGALAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF KATTOOR POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7544 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 120B, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, de facto complainant subscribed for chitty and she auctioned the chitty and at the time of receiving the money, she was asked to give signed blank cheque. Accordingly, it was given. Later, a notice is issued alleging that the cheque was dishonoured and for that purpose, a cheque was forged and thereby in conspiracy the accused have committed offence of cheating. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that the allegations are absolutely false. De facto complainant had subscribed for a chitty and there was default in payment and a suit was filed by the financial institution against de facto complainant for recovery of the money. The matter was settled and the suit was decreed. Thereafter, a personal loan was given to de facto complainant on the strength of a cheque issued by her and the cheque was dishonoured on presentation. BA.7544/08 2 A notice was issued to de facto complainant, but she did not send any reply. Instead of that, she has filed a false complaint against petitioners alleging that notice was sent by forging a cheque which was given at the time of auctioning the chitty. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that according to de facto complainant, the cheque was given at the time of the earlier transaction. On hearing both sides, I find that anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners and the following order is passed: Petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and they shall be released on bail on their executing self bond for Rs.25,000/- each, on the following conditions: i) Petitioners shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. ii). Petitioners shall not commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.