All these applications arise from various crimes registered by the Aluva East police for the offence punishable under Sec.420 r/w Sec.34 of the Indian Penal Code against a lady (petitioner in B.A.No.3132 of 2014, her father and husband). The allegation is that the petitioners and another making the de facto complainants believe that they are engaged in making films and if invested money, would return 10% profit, collected large sum of money but cheated them. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner in B.A.No.3132 of 2014 contends that her relationship with her husband (petitioner in other applications) was strained much before and herself, her father had disassociated themselves with the activities of the husband and a public notice was also given to that effect. It is contended that the husband has taken every responsibility to pay amount due to the de facto complainants. It is also pointed out that in several other cases registered against the petitioner in B.A.No.3132 of 2014, this Court has granted pre-arrest bail subject to conditions.
3. Petitioner in B.A.Nos.3464, 3465, 3466, 3467, 3468 and 3469 of 2014 contend that he has no connection with the alleged receipt of money. According to the learned counsel, the money was deposited in the account of the father of the petitioner in B.A.No.3132 of 2014. It is also submitted that in Crime Nos.141 and 175 of 2014 registered by the Perumbavoor police and Crime No.59 of 2014 registered by the Kalady police against the petitioner and others on similar allegation, the petitioner was arrested and detained for about 42 days. In Crime No.558 of 2014 of the Perumbavoor police station, this Court has granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to conditions. According to the learned counsel, detention of the petitioner is not required in these cases as well.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the applications. It is submitted that large sum of money is involved in these cases.
5. It is noticed that the petitioner in these applications (other than B.A.No.3132 of 2014) was in custody for about 42 days though in connection with certain other cases and in Crime No.558 of 2014 of Perumbavoor police station, this Court has granted pre-arrest bail to the said petitioner vide order dated 07.03.2014 in B.A.No.1409 of 2014. Similar orders have been passed in favour of the petitioner in B.A.No.3132 of 2014 in other cases having regard to the nature of contentions she raised and the documents she produced in this Court.
6. Having heard both sides, I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of these petitioners is not required in these cases. Hence I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions protecting the interest of the de facto complainants as well.
The applications are disposed of as under:
I B.A.Nos.3132 and 3464 of 2014:
Petitioners shall surrender before the officer(s) investigating Crime No.1472 of 2014 of the Aluva East Police Station on 03.06.2014 at 10a.m and on other dates as the investigating officer may direct in case interrogation is not completed.
II B.A.Nos.3465, 3466, 3467, 3468 and 3469 of 2014:
Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime Nos.1693, 1691, 1690, 1692 and 1694 of 2014 of the Aluva East Police Station on 03.06.2014 and on other dates as may be directed by the investigating officer, in case interrogation is not completed.
III In case arrest of the petitioners is recorded, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate in all the cases the same day.
IV On such production the petitioners shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on their executing bond for `25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:
(a) Petitioners shall file affidavits before the learned magistrate in all the aforesaid cases while executing the bail bond detailing the immovable properties they have and undertaking that they will not dispose of or encumber the said properties until culmination of the aforesaid proceedings or until otherwise permitted by the learned magistrate.
(b) Petitioners shall also file attested copy of the said affidavits before the Sub Registrar concerned within a week from the date of their release.
(c) Petitioners shall report to the officer(s) investigating the cases as and when required for interrogation.
(d) Petitioners shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(e) Petitioners shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(f) In case the petitioners violate any of condition Nos.(b) to (e), it is open to the investigating officer to move the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K Shaji Vs. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).
Sbna True Copy Sd/-
THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.
P A to Judge