High Court Kerala High Court

Sajeev @ Thampan vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2009

Kerala High Court
Sajeev @ Thampan vs State Of Kerala on 10 February, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 151 of 2009()


1. SAJEEV @ THAMPAN, S/O. DAYANANDA BABU,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :10/02/2009

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                       --------------------------------
                       B.A. No.151 OF 2009
                       --------------------------------
           Dated this the 10th day of February, 2009


                              O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 of I.P.C.

According to prosecution, defacto complainant owns a car and

this was given to petitioner on rental basis for a period of 3

months for his personal use. Though the period is over, he did

not return the car and hence, the complaint.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that even as

per the allegations in the complaint, petitioner is entitled to

use the car until 10.09.2008. Even though the said period was

over, the defacto complainant did not make any complaint for

more than 3 months. He filed a complaint only on 30.12.2008

and there is no explanation for the long delay. Actually the

defacto complainant owes money to petitioner by virtue of

Annexure B agreement and Rs.1Lakh is to be returned to

petitioner within 27.12.2008. Petitioner demanded the money

back and hence, after 3 days, on 30.12.2008, the complaint is

filed. It is also submitted that this court had directed

B.A.No.151 of 2009
2

petitioner to make himself available for interrogation by the

investigating officer to explain petitioner’s innocence and he

had reported before the investigating officer on 21.01.2009

but, he was not questioned by the investigating officer and he

was let off. Though the case was posted from 27.01.2009

onwards, there is no instruction from the police to the learned

Public Prosecutor. Hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it

is submitted.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that so far, no

instruction is received and he prays for time.

On hearing both sides, I do not find that any further time

need to be granted for getting instructions. I am satisfied that

it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

Hence, the following order is passed :

Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate

court concerned within seven days from today

and he shall be released on bail on his executing

bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties

each for like sum to the satisfaction of the

learned Magistrate on the following conditions :

B.A.No.151 of 2009
3

i) Petitioner shall report before the

Investigating Officer as and when directed.

ii) Petitioner shall not influence or intimidate

any witness or commit any offence while

on bail.

The petition is allowed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE

pac