IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5860 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 27/2008 OF VIYYUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER (S): -------------------- RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.APPI NADAR, THERANILA MELEPUTHENVEEDU, RAMAVARMAPURAM P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.BABU PAUL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE S.I. OF POLICE, VIYYUR POLICE STATION. 3. THE C.I. OF POLICE, TOWN WEST, THRISSUR. BY P.P. SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 5860 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 25th day of September,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 448 and 506(1) and 384 IPC. According to the prosecution, petitioner trespassed into the house of defacto-complainant, criminally intimidated her and obtained certain papers signed from her under threat and coercion. On a complaint lodged by defacto-complainant, a crime was registered against petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is an athletic coach in the Police Academy at Thrissur. Petitioner's friend had rented out a building to defacto- complainant at Mahi and defacto-complainant vacated the building also. But, on the allegation that she had not paid the entire rent, a dispute had arisen between tenant and landlord. Petitioner being the friend of the landlord is now falsely implicated in the offence. Originally, offence under section 384 IPC was not included, but subsequently, it was added. The allegations made against petitioner are absolutely false, it is submitted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor conceded that offence under section 384 IPC was subsequently incorporated. But, as per the allegations made, petitioner had trespassed into the house of defacto-complainant and committed various offences. In the First BA 5860 /08 -2- Information Statement what is alleged is that was made to sign some papers which are written. But at the time of questioning defacto-complainant stated that some blank papers were got signed .In the above circumstances, it is submitted that petitioner may be directed to surrender before the investigating Officer and subject to that he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to petitioner. 5. Hence, the following order is passed:- (1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and make himself available for interrogation. (2) Thereafter, in the event of his arrest, if any, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the following conditions:- i) Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation. ii) Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. BA 5860 /08 -3- iii) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence any witness or tamper with evidence or commit any offence while on bail. This petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.