IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 26TH JULY 2011 / 4TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5728 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.686/2011 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION KOZHIKODE PETITIONER: ACCUSED --------------------------- IBRAHIM M.P., S/O.AMMAD, KUTTIKATTIL HOUSE, PONMAI, VATAKARA-673542. BY ADV. SRI.PULIKKOOL ABUBACKER SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VATAKARA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5728 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.686 of 2011 of Vatakara Police Station, Kozhikode District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 465 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following:- The de facto complainant took a loan of Rupees Three lakhs from the accused. At the time of availing the loan, the de facto complainant had issued signed cheque and signed stamp paper as security. The de facto complainant stated that he repaid the loan but the cheque and stamp paper were not returned by the accused stating that they were lost. Later accused caused to issue a lawyer's notice demanding that the de facto complainant has to pay money on the basis of a cheque. According to the de facto complainant, the accused has committed the aforesaid offences. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has filed a civil suit against the de facto Bail Appln.No.5728/2011 : 2 : complainant claiming the amount covered by the cheque. It is also stated that the petitioner informed the police about the offences committed by the de facto complainant and accordingly Crime No.400 of 2011 was registered against him under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the de facto complainant was granted bail in Crime No.400 of 2011. The counsel also submits that the de facto complainant is involved in several criminal cases. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offences and other circumstances, 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 for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; Bail Appln.No.5728/2011 : 3 : B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. C) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. D) 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 skj