T. Biju vs State of Kerala

Thomas P. Joseph, J.—Petitioner is the third accused in Crime No. 264 of 2014 of the Mavelikara Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 423, 406 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, apprehends arrest and has filed the application.

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that the petitioner and others entered into an agreement with the de facto complainant for construction of a residential building for Rs. 46,04,000/- within a specified time, an agreement was executed between the petitioner and de facto complainant on 17.02.2010, the petitioner and the accused 1 and 2 received a total sum of Rs. 1,11,93,500/- from the de facto complainant but, he was cheated.

Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. According to the learned counsel, it is not correct that the amount as claimed by the de facto complainant was collected. As per the agreement the de facto complainant was to supply materials but he did not do so on time. According to the learned counsel construction of the building is completed and handed over to the de facto complainant. It is also pointed that though the amount paid by the de facto complainant was deposited in the account of accused 1 and 2, they were granted pre-arrest bail by this Court as per order dated 09.05.2014 in B.A. No. 2851 of 2014.

I have gone through copy of the said order. Having regard to the relief granted to the accused 1 and 2 and in the nature of allegations made against the petitioner, I am inclined to think that his custodial interrogation is not required. Hence I am inclined to grant relief but subject to conditions.

Application is allowed as under:

(i) Petitioner shall surrender before the Officer investigating Crime No. 264 of 2014 of the Mavelikara Police Station on 12.06.2014 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 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 file affidavit before the learned magistrate while executing the bail bond detailing the immovable proprieties he has and undertaking that he will not dispose of or otherwise encumber the said properties until otherwise ordered by the learned magistrate or culmination of the proceeding against him whichever is earlier.

(c) Petitioner shall file the attested copy of the said affidavit before the Registrar/Sub Registrar concerned within a week from the date of his release of bail.

(d) 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 filing of the final report whichever is earlier.

(e) Petitioner shall report to the officer investigating the case as and when required for interrogation.

(f) Petitioner shall not intimidate or influence the witnesses.

(g) Petitioner shall not, during the period of this bail get involved in any offence.

(v) It is made clear that in case any of condition Nos. (c) to (g) is violated, it is open to the Investigating Officer to seek cancellation of the bail granted hereby by moving application before the learned magistrate as held in P.K. Shaji @ Thammanam Shaji Vs. State of Kerala, .