IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7167 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.107/08 OF VILAPPILSALA POLICE STATION PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. KAMALESH KRISHNA, KRIPA BHAVAN, NEAR C.S.I.CHURCH,VIZHAVOOR P.O.,TRIVANDRUM. 2. INDIRA BAI, KRIPA BHAVAN, NEAR C.S.I.CHURCH,VIZHAVOOR P.O.,TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN SRI.M.R.SASITH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7167 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420, 468 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, accused 1 and 2 are husband and wife. An extent of property which belonged to accused 1 and 2, was mortgaged in favour of the State Bank of Travancore by deposit of title deed. Thereafter, with a view to cheat de facto complainant, they executed a settlement deed in favour of third accused and third accused executed an assignment deed in favour of de facto complainant and obtained Rs.48,000/- from him. Later, de facto complainant came to know that the property was already mortgaged and accused have cheated him. 3. Petitioners are accused 2 and 3 in the crime. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are not involved in the crime. They are falsely implicated in the offence. First accused was released on bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that considering the nature of allegations made by the prosecution, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. It is also BA.7167/08 2 submitted that all the three accused have specific role in the commission of offence. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the seriousness of the allegations made and the nature of allegations required, I am satisfied that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The crime is registered as early as on 3.7.2008 and petitioners were not available for investigation for the past so many months. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether petitioners surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them at any time and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.