IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3638 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRMP.1574/2009 IN CRIME NO.752/09 OF KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER : 3RD ACCUSED ----------------------------------- MURALEEDHARAN K., AGED 42 YEARS, REVATHY NILAYAM, KOZHUVALLAKAR P.O., CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.C.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, THORUGH THE SI OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------- B.A.No.3638 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused No.3 in Crime No.752 of 2009 of Kottarakara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 419, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The defacto complainant is the brother of the second accused. The first accused is the son-in-law of the second accused. The case of defacto complainant is that in 1999, Raman, the father of the defacto complainant and accused No.2, executed a settlement deed in favour of the defacto complainant and the second accused. Subsequently, the accused Nos.1 and 2 got executed document No.4248 of 1999 as if it was executed by Raman cancelling the settlement deed. Raman did not execute any such document. Raman died on 9.1.2000. The present case is initiated as per the petition dated 2.1.2009 submitted by the defacto complainant before the Additional Director General of Police, Crime Branch. The petition filed by the defacto complainant would also disclose that there are several litigations between the parties. Even the children of the defacto BA No.3638/2009 2 complainant have filed cases against him. Those cases are pending. The offence was committed, according to the defacto complainant, in 1999. The defacto complainant filed the petition in respect of the same before the police only in 2009. The Petitioner is the scribe of document No.4248 of 1999. 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 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.50,000/- 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