Kuriachan @ Cyriac Mathew Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2013 4TH SRAVANA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 5173 of 2013 () ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 654/2013 OF NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION , IDUKKI DISTRICT -------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- KURIACHAN @ CYRIAC MATHEW,AGED 6 YEARS, S/O. P.C.MATHEW, PANNIVELIL VEETTIL, RAMAKKALMETTUKARAYIL, PARATHODE VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI. BY SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV.SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------- 1. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NEDUMKANDAM POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2. T.A.BONY, AGED 4 YEARS, S/O. T.V.ANTONY, THAPPALODATH VEETTIL, CHUTTUPADUKARAYIL, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 024. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA.T.Y. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.

----------------------------------------------- B.A No.5173 of 2013 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of July, 2013 ORDER Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.654 of 2013 of Nedumkandam Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Sections 418, 420 and 468 of Indian Penal Code, which is now under investigation. He seeks anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Crime was registered on a private complaint filed before Magistrate, which was referred to police for investigation and report. Annexure II is the copy of complaint. Learned counsel for petitioner adverting to Annexure II submitted that after the period fixed under the agreement of sale was over de facto complainant launched the criminal proceeding filing the complaint raising false and baseless allegations. De facto complainant issued a notice after the B.A No.5173/2013 2 expiry of the period covered by the agreement of sale and that was responded with a reply by petitioner expressing willingness to execute a sale deed in terms of the agreement. Since de facto complainant did not have the sale price agreed with him, he initiated the criminal proceedings with a complaint, is the submission of counsel. Arrest and custodial interrogation of petitioner is essential for a fair investigation of the crime, is the submission of learned Public Prosecutor referring to the allegations imputed in Annexure II complaint.

3. After looking into the allegations raised in the complaint with reference to the submissions made by counsel on both sides, I find, the circumstances presented indicate of a civil dispute though the allegations imputed, no doubt, make out penal offences as well. The above observation made shall not be construed or treated as decisive, but only made for disposal of this petition; which shall have no bearing over investigation/trial. In the given facts and circumstances B.A No.5173/2013 3 presented, I find, petitioner can be granted pre-arrest bail with direction to co-operate with investigation of the crime. Petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer at 10:00 a.m on 02.08.2013. On such appearance, after his interrogation, in the event of his arrest in the crime, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety for the like sum. He shall report before the Investigating Officer later also, if his presence is demanded, for the purpose of investigation of the crime. He shall not leave the State for a period of six months or till completion of investigation of the crime, whichever is earlier, without getting prior permission from the Investigating Officer in writing. Petition is allowed. vdv S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE