IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2603 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.25/2009 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED --------------------------------------- 1. HARIKUMAR D., S/O.DIVAKARA PANICKER, AGED 36 YEARS, RESIDING AT SHYLA NILAYAM, T.C. 8/1238, KUNDAMON BHAGOM, THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SOBHA RANI, W/O.HARIKUMAR, AGED 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT SHYLA NILAYAM, T.C. 8/1238, KUNDAMON BHAGOM, THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. B.YOGESH, S/O.BHASKARAN, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT SOBHA NIVAS, T.C. 8/1270, KUNDAMON BHAGOM, THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.25 OF 2009 OF POOJAPPURA POLICE STATION) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------- B.A.No.2603 of 2009 ----------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are the accused in Crime No.25 of 2009 of Poojappura Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 380, 426, 454 and 462 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram, which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was registered. The case of the defacto complainant is that she purchased the property from the accused persons as per the registered document dated 7.1.2008. The accused persons were residing in the house. On humanitarian consideration, they were allowed to continue to reside there for some time. The defacto complainant was residing in a rented house. She wanted to shift her residence to the house in question. Accordingly, the accused persons vacated the house and shifted their residence to BA No.2603/2009 2 another house. When the daughter of the defacto complainant went to Madurai for business purpose, the defacto complainant accompanied her and went to Madurai after putting the house under lock and key. Knowing that the defacto complainant was not in station, the accused persons trespassed into the house and started residing there. They also committed theft of valuable articles mentioned in the complaint. The complaint is dated 23.1.2009. The date of incident is not mentioned in the complaint. 4. The petitioners have a different story. They say that the daughter of the defacto complainant is a money lender from whom amounts were borrowed by the accused. Mortgage deed in respect of the property in question was executed in favour of the defacto complainant. Later, the loan was repaid. But, the necessary documents were not executed by the defacto complainant. All through out the accused persons were residing in the house. At no point of time, they shifted their residence. The accused persons filed O.S.No.274 of 2009 on the file of the court of the First Additional Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram against the defacto complainant. An interim injunction was granted in favour of the accused and against the defacto complainant restraining the latter from forcibly evicting the petitioners. The suit is pending. A Commissioner was appointed. The BA No.2603/2009 3 Commissioner filed a report before court stating that the petitioners were found in possession of the house. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.25,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners 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 csl