service in South Africa. It appears that he is a “typical Keralite”. He was given notice from this Court, when the Court found it necessary to hear him. But despite notice he remained absent. In the nature of the allegations, I feel it appropriate to direct the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for necessary interrogation. The complaint shows that no amount of Indian rupee was received by this petitioner or the other accused in India. Admittedly, the complainant's son and the daughter-inlaw had gone to South Africa and stayed there for some time. The learned counsel submitted that the complainant's son and the daughter-in-law were accommodated by the petitioner herein at his flat, and he had also received some amount by way of rent. That apart, he does not have any connection with the alleged transaction. It is submitted that he had not made any offer. I do not think that any man of commonsense would believe that somebody would arrange Government job in South Africa. Anyway, the complainant herein believed so, and he lost some amount. Let the factual aspects be gone into by the learned Magistrate, when application for bail comes. After necessary interrogation, the request for bail can be appropriately considered
