IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 31ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 479 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO.989/07 OF ADOOR POLICE STATION : PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- THANKAMMA OOMMEN, AGED 69 YEARS, PEEDIKAYIL KOCHUPUTHEN VEETTIL, KARUVATTA MURI, PERINGANADU VILLAGE, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADOOR POLICE STATION, ADOOR. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.479 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner is the 4th accused. Altogether there are 4 accused persons. They face allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 120 B, 415, 406 & 468 I.P.C. The crux of the allegations is that the 1st accused is the owner of a larger extent of property. He had pledged the entire property to the Nedungadi Bank as surety for a loan availed by a relative of his. Subsequently in 2003, he transferred 13 cents out of that larger extent to the 2nd accused-his wife, as per a settlement deed. The 2nd accused, in turn, in 2004, assigned 10 cents out of those 13 cents to the petitioner herein and another 3 cents to the 3rd accused. The petitioner, in 2006, transferred his rights over the 10 cents to the 3rd accused who transferred his rights over the entire 13 cents to the defacto complainant. The defacto complainant was kept in the dark about the pledging of the property by the 1st accused. Even the 2nd accused had pledged the property to a Co-operative bank and raised a loan, which transaction was also suppressed from the defacto complainant. B.A.No.479 of 2008 2 The defacto complainant filed a private complaint, in which it is alleged that all the 4 accused had conspired together to defraud him and to defeat his interest. It was referred to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. 2. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in any view of the matter, the petitioner who had received 10 cents of land in 2004 and transferred the same to the 3rd accused in 2006 cannot be assumed to have any culpable intention or knowledge. In any view of the matter, the petitioner, who cannot be attributed with any contumacious or culpable intention in the transactions in 2004 in his favour from the 2nd accused and the transaction by her in favour of the 3rd accused in 2006, is entitled for grant of anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 3. Notice was given. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. I am satisfied, in the facts and circumstances of the case, that the petitioner herein can be granted anticipatory bail subject of course to appropriate conditions. The learned Public Prosecutor prays that it may be clarified that grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner cannot clothe accused 1 to 3 with any right to claim anticipatory bail. Needless to say that it shall be so. B.A.No.479 of 2008 3 4. In the result, the Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 07.02.2008. She shall be enlarged on regular bail on her executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 3 p.m on 08.02.2008 and 09.02.2008. During this period, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter the petitioner shall make herself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays for a period of one month and subsequently as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with her in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; B.A.No.479 of 2008 4 iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to her surrender on 07.02.08 as directed in clause (1) above, she shall be released from custody on her executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 07.02.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-