High Court Kerala High Court

S. Anil Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
S. Anil Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 2260 of 2008()


1. S. ANIL KUMAR, S/O. SUDHAKARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SANU.S.PANICKER

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/04/2008

 O R D E R
                               R.BASANT, J
                       ------------------------------------
                        B.A.No.2260 of 2008
                       -------------------------------------
                Dated this the 11th day of April, 2008

                                   ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the 2nd

accused. Altogether there are 3 accused persons. They face

allegations in a crime registered alleging the offence punishable

under Section 420 r/w 34 I.P.C.

2. The crux of the complaint is that the accused persons

induced the defacto complaint, a B.A Degree holder, to part with

an amount of Rs.1.25 lakhs as advance towards a total amount of

Rs.5 lakhs to be paid as consideration for securing a teacher’s job

in an institution run by the 1st accused. The amount was paid

directly to the 1st accused in the presence of accused 2 and 3, it is

alleged. The payment was made in January, 2005. Long later in

2007, a compliant has been filed. Crime has been registered.

Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent

arrest.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent. He had no contumacious

involvement in the alleged deception practiced on the defacto

B.A.No.2260 of 2008 2

complainant by the 1st accused. In any view of the matter, the

petitioner does not deserve to suffer the trauma of arrest and

incarceration. He may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the

application, but only prays that appropriate conditions may be

imposed. Even the case of the defacto complainant is only that

the amount was directly handed over to the 1st accused. The role

of the other accused in inducing the complainant to part with

money deserves to be probed, submits the learned Public

Prosecutor .

5. In the result, this Bail Application is, allowed. The

following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned

Magistrate at 11 a.m on 21.04.2008. He shall be enlarged on

regular bail on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

thousand only) 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

1 p.m on 22.04.2008 and 23.04.2008. During this period, the

Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the

B.A.No.2260 of 2008 3

petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper

conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall make

himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer

between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays and Fridays for a

period of two months and subsequently as and when 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 those directions were not issued at all;

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

21.04.08 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released

from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees

Fifty thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear

before the learned Magistrate on 21.04.08.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
rtr/-