IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2009 / 8TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4171 of 2009() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.195/2009 OF IDUKKI POLICE STATION. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- SHIHABUDHEEN.M.I,AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED ISMAIL,MANATHUVADAKKEPUTHENPURAYIL, KAKKANAD KARA,VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.195 OF 2009 OF IDUKKI POLICE STATION). SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.4171 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 30th day of July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.195/2009 of Idukki Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The case of the defacto complainant is as follows: He entered into an agreement with the first accused to purchase two stage carriage buses for a consideration of Rs.35,75,000/-. A total sum of Rs.16,00,000/- was paid to the first accused. Certain conditions were stipulated in the agreement executed between the defacto complainant and the first accused. It is stated that there was exchange of a vehicle subsequently and a sum of Rs.1,25,000/- was agreed to be reduced from the consideration. It is alleged that there was default on the part of the first accused to fulfill the terms of B.A. No.4171 / 2009 Page numbers the agreement. It is alleged that on 3/07/2009, the vehicles were taken by force by the accused with the help of goondas. It is alleged that the amount was received by the accused with intention to cheat the defacto complainant. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant had no intention to fulfill his part of contract and he wanted to withdraw from the agreement. The story of forceful dispossession is put forward only to project a case that the accused was at fault. It is submitted that the defacto complainant has filed O.S. No.170/2009 on the file of Sub Court, Kattapana for realisation of the sum of Rs.16,59,000/- from the first accused. The suit is pending. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petitioner is prepared to pay back the amount received from the defacto complainant after deducting a reasonable sum as the collection charges for the period of about one month, during which the defacto complainant was plying the vehicles. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of B.A. No.4171 / 2009 Page numbers 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 Rs.25,000/- 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; 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 scm