IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2794 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO. NOT KNOWN OF PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. RIYAS SALIM,AGED 25 YEARS,S/O.P.T.SALIM, C.V.M.PURAYIDAM,VETTIPPURAM,PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE AND DISTRICT. 2. P.T.SALIM,AGED 55 YEARS,S/O.C.V.M. PURAYIDAM,VETTIPPURAM,PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE AND DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. THE C.I.OF POLICE,PATHANAMTHITTA POLICE STATION. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ SRI.S.M.ALTHAF FOR ADDL.RES. SRI.C.JAYACHANDRAN (KAYAMKULAM) FOR ADDL.RES. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ----------------------- B.A No.2794 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of July 2010 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 408 of IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner was working abroad in an electronics company as a salesman. In respect of sale of SIM card and also the recharge coupons, petitioner received 4,12,765/- Soudi Riyal (which is equivalent to Rs.50,00,000/- in India) and without remitting the same in the company, he left Soudi Arabia with a forged passport. Thereby, he committed offence under Section 408 of IPC. A crime is registered under Section 408 of IPC. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that since the offence is committed in Soudi Arabia, no crime can be registered in India. A case is already registered in Soudi Arabia against first accused on the same set of facts. It is also submitted that a complaint was sent by the Company to the Superintendent of Police, Pathanamthitta through embassy. But, no action was taken on the said complaint, Annexure A. But, it is on the basis of a complaint made by an employee's father that a crime is registered.Petitioner cannot be proceeded against on the basis of a complaint made by the father of an employee of the company who has nothing to do with B.A No.2794 OF 2010 2 the company. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned counsel for de facto complainant and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. It is submitted by Learned Public Prosecutor that the second petitioner is not made an accused so far in this case and hence, police has no intention to arrest him. This submission is recorded and hence anticipatory bail cannot be granted to him. It is submitted by them that there is absolutely no bar in registering a crime against an Indian citizen in respect of an offence committed outside India by virtue of Section 188 of Cr.P.C. 5. The accused is available within the limits of Pathanamthitta Police Station and hence, he can be proceeded against on the basis of the crime registered against him in Pathanamthitta Police Station. The allegations made are serious in nature and accused is required for the purpose of interrogation. 6. On hearing both sides and on considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The crime is already registered in a police station within limits of which the first petitioner is alleged to be found. The complaint discloses allegations which prima facie constitute offences under the Indian Penal Code which are committed by an Indian citizen outside India. It is well settled that a crime can be B.A No.2794 OF 2010 3 registered anywhere in India where accused may be found, by virtue of Section 188 Cr.P.C. He is bound to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with investigation without any delay. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA JUDGE vdv