IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2010 / 28TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3203 of 2010() ----------------------------- APPLICANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------- K.VIDYADHARAN THAMPI, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, 441, GANDHI NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 20. BY ADV. SMT.P.K.PRIYA SRI.K.V.SREE VINAYAKAN SRI.K.M.HASHIR RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, REPRESENTING S.H.O. TOWN SOUTH POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3203 of 2010 ----------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, first accused hatched a criminal conspiracy and cheated de facto complainant by selling a property, which is already mortgaged in the bank by suppressing the fact that it was mortgaged. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner and first accused's property was pledged in the bank in the year 1998. Since money was not paid back, proceedings were initiated on the property, at the instance of the bank before the D.R.T. The execution proceedings are now pending before the D.R.T. As per the allegations in the complaint, first accused sold the property to the third accused and he in turn, assigned it to fourth accused, who in turn, assigned it to de facto complainant. It is not correct to say that the mortgage was suppressed. After a very long time of the assignment of property by first accused, B.A. No. 3203 of 2010 2 a complaint is lodged alleging criminal offences. The only allegation against petitioner is that he hatched a criminal conspiracy. He has nothing to do with any transaction. This is only because of the first accused stood as a surety for petitioner while he took loan from the bank. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that the dispute is of a civil nature and the allegations made against petitioner are too vague. Hence, petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail on the conditions, the following order is passed: 1. Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. 2. On such surrender, he shall 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 learned Magistrate, on the following conditions: B.A. No. 3203 of 2010 3 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 or tamper with the evidence. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln