IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2009 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2691 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRMP.709/2009 of DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM CRIME NO.59/2009 OF RAMAPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : -------------------- KRISHNAPRASANTH, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.SUDHAKARAN, THOTTATHIL HOUSE, VELLILAPPILLY VILLAGE, EZHACHERRY KARA. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT : ---------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.59 OF 2009 OF RAMAPURAM POLICE STATION). SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.2691 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of June, 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 accused in Crime No.59/2009 of Ramapuram Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class -I, Pala, which was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of which, the crime was registered. 4. The allegations made in the complaint are the following: The accused was running Priya Cable Vision Network. As per the agreement entered into between the accused and the defacto complainant, the latter agreed to purchase the Cable T.V. network for a consideration of Rs.15lakhs. The defacto complainant was under the belief that he could receive signals from B.A. No.2691/ 2009 2 Four Star Vision Company run by him and his brother. Later, Kottayam Cable Channel Distribution Pvt. Ltd. filed a suit before the Munsiff's court and got an injunction order against the petitioner from receiving signals from any channel other than that of Kottayam Cable Channel Distribution Pvt. Ltd.. The defacto complainant states that the accused did not disclose at the time of the agreement that he had entered into an agreement with Kottayam Cable Channel Distribution Pvt. Ltd. and that fact was suppressed at the time of agreement and thereby the accused committed the offence of cheating. 5. 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 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 for a period of one month on his executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the B.A. No.2691/ 2009 3 satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) On the expiry of the period mentioned above, the petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail. F) 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