Petitioner apprehends arrest by the Shornur Police in Crime No.403 of 2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 463, 464, 465, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code registered on the strength of a complaint filed by the de facto complainant in the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ottappalam and forwarded to the Police for investigation. 2. Case is that the petitioner forged consent letters from the de facto complainant and obtained licence to run medical shop in his building.
3. Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. It is submitted that the petitioner is doing business in the room in question even before the de facto complainant purchased the building in 2007. Thereafter Annexures-A2 and A3 licence/rent deeds were executed between the petitioner and the de facto complainant and the de facto complainant is receiving rent from the petitioner. While so the de fact complainant made several attempts to evict the petitioner. As part of that, the de facto complainant has filed the present complaint.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the Officer investigating the case has requested for a copy of the consent letter allegedly forged by the petitioner to get expert opinion on it.
5. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am satisfied that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence I am inclined to grant relief.
Application is disposed of as under:
(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the the Officer investigating Crime No.403 of 2014 of the Shornur Police Station on 02.06.2014 at 10.00 a.m for interrogation.
(ii) If interrogation of the petitioner is not completed that day, he shall appear before the officer investigating the case on the day/days and time as directed by him which the petitioner shall comply.
(iii) Petitioner shall hand over all relevant documents in the his custody, control and possession to the Officer investigating the case as required by him.
(iv) In case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
(v) On such production, the petitioner shall be released (if not required to be detained otherwise) on his executing bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty 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 co-operate with the investigation.
(c) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case on every alternate Saturday between 10.00 a.m and 12.00 p.m for a period of two months or until final report is filed, whichever is earlier.
(d) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation.
(e) Petitioner shall not get involved in any offence during the period of this bail.
(f) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
(vi) In case the petitioner violates any of conditions (b) to (f), it is open to the investigating Officer to move the learned magistrate for cancellation of the bail as held in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala (AIR 2006 SC 100).
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.
vsv