Petitioners 2 and 3 are accused Nos.2 and 1, respectively in Crime No.395 of 2014 of the Kazhakootam Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The first petitioner is a company of which the petitioners 2 and 3 are the chairman and managing director. They apprehend arrest and have filed the application. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per version of the de facto complainant, he was offered a job in the aforesaid company on a salary of `8,000/- per month for the first six months and thereafter, @ `10,000 - `18,000/- per month. `50,000/- was taken as security. The de facto complainant worked in the company for about two months. Thereafter, he was not given the salary as agreed. For repayment of the security amount, a cheque was issued to the petitioner, but that cheque was dishonored.
3. The learned counsel submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are not true. It is also submitted that in case the de facto complainant wanted to terminate his service, he was required to give notice in writing which he did not.
4. Having regard to the nature of the allegations, I am inclined to think that custodial interrogation of the petitioners 2 and 3 is not required. At the same time, the interest of the de facto complainant has to be protected.
The application is disposed of as under :
1. Since the first petitioner is a company, it cannot have any apprehension of arrest.
2. Petitioners 2 and 3 shall surrender before the officer investigating the case on 06.06.2014 at 10 am.
3. In case interrogation is not completed that day, they shall appear before the officer investigating the case any other day/days and time as directed by the investigating officer.
4. It is open for the petitioners 2 and 3 to produce all the relevant records in their custody, control and possession and relating to the matter before the investigating officer.
5. In case the petitioners 2 and 3 are arrested, they shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate the same day.
6. On such production, the petitioners 2 and 3 shall be released if not required to be detained otherwise on their executing bond of `20,000/- (Rupees twenty 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 2 and 3 shall deposit a sum of `50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) in a nationalized bank (initially for a period of two years and renewable as per the order of the learned magistrate) and produce the Fixed Deposit receipt before the learned magistrate while executing the bail bond.
b. In case the petitioners 2 and 3 or any of them are/is found liable to pay compensation to the de facto complainant, such compensation to the extent possible could be realised from the amount in deposit.
c. Petitioners 2 and 3 shall report to the investigating officer as and when required for interrogation.
d. Petitioners 2 and 3 shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.
e. In case the petitioners 2 and 3 violate any of conditions Nos.(c) & (d), bail granted to them hereby is liable to be cancelled on the investigating officer moving application before the learned Magistrate as held in P.K.Shaji v.State of Kerala [AIR 2006 SC 100] AMV sd/-
THOMAS P. JOSEPH JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE