High Court Kerala High Court

Ramachandru Kurup vs State Of Kerala on 4 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
Ramachandru Kurup vs State Of Kerala on 4 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 2082 of 2008()


1. RAMACHANDRU KURUP, S/O.GOVINDAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :04/04/2008

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                     B.A. No.2082 of 2008
            -------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008

                               ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner is the

father of the de facto complainant. The allegation is of theft

punishable under Sec.379 of the IPC. A car belonging to the

son/the de facto complainant was allegedly handed over to the

father/accused three years back for his use. It is the

contention of the son that he had, at the time when the car was

so handed over, left a signed blank cheque leaf in the car. The

father did not return the same. He allegedly misutilised the

same. He handed it over to another person who has now

staked a claim on the strength of the said cheque against the

de facto complainant/the son.

2. A crime has been registered on the basis of a First

Information Statement lodged by the de facto complainant.

B.A. No.2082 of 2008 -: 2 :-

Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends

imminent arrest.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays, the learned

Public Prosecutor does not oppose the said prayer and I am

satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that the

petitioner can be granted anticipatory bail. Appropriate

conditions to facilitate a proper and efficient investigation can, of

course, be imposed.

4. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following

directions are issued under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C:

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned

Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m. on 11/4/08. He shall be

released on regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/-

with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction

of the learned Magistrate.

(ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for

interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m.

and 3 p.m. on 15/4/08 and 16/4/08. Thereafter the petitioner

shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays

between 10 a.m. and 12 noon for a period of one month.

Subsequently, he shall so make himself available for

interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when

B.A. No.2082 of 2008 -: 3 :-

directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so.

(iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned

Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall

thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to

arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as

if these directions were not issued at all.

(iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender

on 11/4/08 as directed in clause (i) above, he shall be released on

his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- without any sureties

undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 11/4/08.

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/