IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 9234 of 2011 CRIME NO.295 OF 2011 OF HEMAMBIKA NAGAR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.1: --------------------------- K. GANESH KUMAR, S/O. KARUPPIAH, SEETHA NIVAS, KALLEKULANGARA.P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO. 295/2011 OF HEMAMBIKA NAGAR POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/12/2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 9234 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.1 in Crime No.295 of 2011 of Hemambika Nagar Police Station, Palakkad District. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 420 and 506(i) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The case of the defacto complainant is that the accused persons collected a sum of `65,000/- from her, offering employment at Dubai for her son. It is alleged that no employment was provided to the son of the defacto complainant and the accused failed to return the amount also. Bail Appl. NO.9234 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 4. According to the petitioner, the entire amount due to the defacto complainant was paid through bank account in the name of Ashok Kumar, the son of the defacto complainant. 5. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 22nd November, 2011, the following order was passed: “5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 28th and 29th November, 2011. 6. Post on 6th December, 2011. 7. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.295 of 2011 of Hemambika Nagar Police Station, till 09/12/2011. 8. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. Bail Appl. NO.9234 OF 2011 :: 3 :: The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 22nd November, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 22nd November, 2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for `10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; Bail Appl. NO.9234 OF 2011 :: 4 :: c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/