IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2009 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6710 of 2009 CRIME NO.325 OF 2009 OF KOZHINJAPARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER: ACCUSED: P. KUNHALASSAN ALIAS, KUNHIPPA, S/O.MOIDU, 48 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, KUNHIPPA CHICKEN STAA, I P 1 - 1647-1652, KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 6710 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of December, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.325 of 2009 of Kozhinjampara Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The petitioner is engaged in the business of chicken. He used to bring chicken from Tamil Nadu in lorry loads. Advance tax has to be paid for the same. The petitioner produced pay orders under the pretext of paying advance tax. Later, it was revealed that those documents were not pay orders, but cheques. On presentation of the cheques, they were dishonoured. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner entrusted the amount for payment of advance tax B.A. NO. 6710 OF 2009 :: 2 :: to one Pradeep Kumar who was regularly involved in the bank transactions. It is stated that he used to get demand drafts on behalf of the customers without any Bank's commission for the same. According to the petitioner, he has paid the amount to Pradeep Kumar. Later, notices were issued to the petitioner for payment of the amount covered by the cheques as well as penalty. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has paid the tax. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and the fact that the petitioner has paid the advance tax, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 6. 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 Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: B.A. NO. 6710 OF 2009 :: 3 :: 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; 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/