IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 412 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 230/07 OF MUHAMMA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- ISMAIL KUNJU, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. YOUSUF, JUBEENA MANZIL, MANNANCHERRY MURI, MANNANCHERRY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.E.RAFEEK RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUHAMMA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 412 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 420 and 468 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations against the petitioner is that he had taken money from the defacto complainant while both of them were employed abroad. The purpose for which money was taken was not accomplished. On the demand of the defacto complainant the petitioner, after their return to India, allegedly executed a cheque. The allegation is that in the said cheque the petitioner, with malicious intent, affixed an incorrect signature leading to the return of the cheque on the ground that signature differs. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are totally incorrect and false. The cheque was not B.A.No. 412 of 2008 2 obtained by the defacto complainant from the petitioner. It was a blank signed cheque which the defacto complainant obtained from the petitioner. The dispute is one which is purely civil in nature. In fact an agreement has been entered into, copy of which is produced as Annex.A2, which shows that the defacto complainant had agreed to receive the amounts and withdraw all the allegations raised against the petitioner. Because the petitioner could not discharge that liability, false and vexatious allegations are now being raised against the petitioner. There is a dispute now as to whether an amount of Rs.10 lakhs is payable or only an amount of Rs. 7.5 lakhs is payable. The petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. He shall co-operate with the Investigators. Any appropriate conditions may be imposed, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the application and I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that the petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail, subject to appropriate terms and conditions. B.A.No. 412 of 2008 3 4. In the result: (1) This application is allowed. (2) The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. (a) The petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate on 7.2.2008 at 11 a.m. The learned Magistrate shall release the petitioner on regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. (b) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. on 8.2.2008 and 9.2.2008. During this period, the investigators shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps in connection with the investigation. Thereafter he shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays and Fridays between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so. B.A.No. 412 of 2008 4 (c) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (1) above, these directions shall lapse on 7.2.08 and the police shall be at liberty thereafter to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law. (d) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 7.2.2008 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any surety undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 7.2.2008. (R. BASANT) Judge tm