IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6303 of 2009() ----------------------------- OP.650/2007 of FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO.413/2009 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ S.SREEKUMAR, ADVOCATE, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.K.SREEDHARAN PILLAI, P.K.M.BUILDINGS, MAITRI NAGAR, VENJARAMMOOD-695607, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.R.RAJAN SRI.NARAYANAN SADASIVAN PILLAI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6303 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.413 of 2009 of Balaramapuram Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: Sasidharan Nair (the de facto complainant), an Advocate practicing at Neyyattinkara Bar has a daughter by name Nithya. A marriage proposal was made by Ajayakumar, the first accused to Nithya. It is alleged that the petitioner has made the proposal on behalf of Ajayakumar. The petitioner is also an Advocate. It is further stated that a sum of Rs.2 lakhs was given by Sasidharan Nair to Ajayakumar. Later, Ajayakumar demanded more money. The de facto complainant was not prepared to pay the same. The marriage proposal therefore did not yield any positive result. The de facto complainant demanded re-payment of the money. Ajayakumar did not repay the amount. The allegation BA No.6303/2009 2 is that the petitioner is also involved in the offence. 4. Taking into account the peculiar 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 on his executing bond for Rs.10,000/- 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 csl