IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5565 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.1564/2008 OF ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION) APPLICANTS/ACCUSED : ----------------- 1. LAKSHMI YADAV, W/O. PECHI MUTHU, LAKSHMI NIVAS, POWER HOUSE EXTENSION ROAD, CEMETERY JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. 2. PECHI MUTHU, LAKSHMI NIVAS, POWER HOUSE EXTENSION ROAD, CEMETERY JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. 3. L. SAPPANI MUTHU, S/O. LINGA KONAR, ORUVELIPARAMBIL HOUSE, POWER HOUSE EXTENSION ROAD, CEMETERY JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. 4. MOORTHY, S/O. SHAPPANI MUTHU, ORUVELIPARAMBIL HOUSE, POWER HOUSE EXTENSION ROAD, CEMETERY JUNCTION, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT AND STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM CENTRAL POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2008 ALONG WITH B.A.5680/08, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl.No. 5565 & 5680 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008. ORDER Petitions for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioners in B.A. No.5565 of 2008 are accused nos. 1 to 4 in the crime and petitioner in B.A.No.5680 of 2008 is the 5th accused in the crime. The alleged offences are under Sections 415, 418, 423, 464, 471, 474, 120(B) and 34 of IPC. According to prosecution, the petitioners, in pursuance of a conspiracy, created a false rent agreement with an intention to cheat the de facto complainant, who is the tenant. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the de facto complainant had filed a suit as early as in 2004 as O.S.No.1255/2004 for an injunction restraining the respondent from evicting by force. In that suit itself, the de facto complainant made a reference to the document which is alleged to be forged. Therefore, the de facto complainant is aware of the existence of the alleged forged document as early as in 2004. It is also pointed out that R.C.P.No.18 of 2007 is filed for eviction of the de facto complainant in [B.A.Nos. 5565 &5680/08] 2 which case also reference is made about the same document. But the present complaint is filed at a highly belated stage. In fact, no document is forged but the rent arrangement was effected on the basis of the rent agreement, which is alleged to be forged by the petitioners. The de facto complainant has made a false allegation as a measure to shield her from eviction proceedings. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail on conditions. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioners shall surrender before the Magistrate court concerned within 7 days from today and if any bail application is filed they shall be released on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on the following conditions: i) Petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer. ii) They shall report before the investigating officer as and when directed. Iii) They shall co-operate with the investigation. Petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.