Petitioner is accused, in Crime No.127 of 2014 of the Marayamuttom Police Station for the offence punishable under Sec.420 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed this application.
2. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application.
It is submitted that the petitioner who is the manager of a school collected Rs.8,00,000/- from the de facto complainant offering job for his wife as teacher. Neither was the job provided nor the money returned.
3. Learned counsel submits that the allegations against the petitioner are not true. Petitioner has not collected any amount from anybody. His brother-in-law had borrowed money from some persons. Petitioner happened to settle some of their claims. Thereafter the persons to whom the brother-in-law owed money started filing complaints against the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the de facto complainant caused another person to file suit against the petitioner for recovery of money based on a dishonoured cheque.
4. In the nature of the allegations made against the petitioner, I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions.
Resultantly this application is disposed of as under:
(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the officer investigating Crime No.127 of 2014 of the Marayamuttom Police Station on 11.06.2014 at 10 a.m for interrogation.
(ii) In case interrogation is not completed that day, it is open to the officer concerned to direct presence of the petitioner on other day/days and time as may be specified by him which the petitioner shall comply.
(iii) In case arrest of the petitioner is recorded, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
(iv) On such production the petitioner shall be released on bail (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for `15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned magistrate and subject to the following conditions:
(a) One of the sureties shall be a close relative of the petitioner.
(b) Petitioner shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for interrogation.
(c) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(e) In case the petitioner violates any of condition Nos.(b) to (d), 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