IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 734 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.198382007 OF PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION .................... : PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- BIJU.P.THOMAS, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, PANIKULAM HOUSE, PULIYANAM, ANGAMALY. BY ADV. SRI.N.C.MOHANAN SMT.REKHA C.NAIR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANTS ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERUMBAVOOR POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.734 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations for an offence punishable inter alia under Sections 420 and 471 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that there has been improper use of a trade name by the petitioner. The petitioner was earlier partner of a firm which was manufacturing a medicine by name D-Piles. That partnership firm was dissolved and the de facto complainant is allegedly continuing the business now as the sole proprietor. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner had started transacting business in the very same medicine by the name D-Piles. By doing this, the petitioner has committed offences punishable inter alia under Section 420 I.P.C, it is alleged. 2. Notice was given to the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. The facts have been explained to me. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case that the petitioner can be granted B.A.No.734/08 2 anticipatory bail. In the absence of opposition, it is not necessary for me to facts in any greater detail in this order. 3. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C in favour of the petitioner. i) Petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m on 15/02/2008. He shall be released on regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the investigating officer between 10 a.m and 3 p.m on 16/02/2008 and 18/02/2008. During this period, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation in this crime. Thereafter the petitioner shall so appear on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m and 12 noon for a period of two months and subsequently B.A.No.734/08 3 as and when directed by the investigating officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law, as if these directions were not issued at all. (iv) If he were arrested prior to 15/02/2008, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) without any sureties, undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15/02/2008. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr B.A.No.734/08 4 B.A.No.734/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007