IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 4TH OCTOBER 2010 / 12TH ASWINA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 5426 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------ (CRIME NO. 10/2006 CBCID, THRISSUR) ....... PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.9 -------------------------------------- P.SHYMESH, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.K.MUKUNDAN NAIR, UPASANA, PONNOTH ROAD, KALOOR, COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.B.RAMAN PILLAI SRI. S. RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.10/2006 CBCID, THRISSUR). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ V.RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.5426 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010 ORDER The petitioner, who is accused No.9 in Crime No.10 of 2006 of CBCID, Thrissur for offences punishable under Sections 489(B) & (C) of I.P.C., seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application contending inter alia that the petitioner's complexity has been revealed by A8 (Sajeev Gopinath) on 8/6/2009 to the effect that fake notes were handed over to him by A9 the petitioner herein. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the alleged complicity of the petitioner is revealed only after nearly four years of registering the crime and it is because of the close association between A8 and the present investigating officer that the petitioner has now been roped in as A9 and that A8 is the real 'villain'. 4. Anticipatory bail cannot be granted in a case of this nature. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for Bail Appln.No.5426/2010 : 2 : regular bail considered by the Magistrate having jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 18/10/2010 or on 19/10/2010 for the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating material, if any. The petitioner shall thereafter be produced before the Magistrate who on being satisfied that the petitioner has been interrogated by the police shall consider and dispose of his application for regular bail preferably on the same date on which it is filed. In case there is no incriminating material against the petitioner, the investigating officer shall submit a report to that effect before the Magistrate and release the petitioner on bail. This petition is disposed of as above. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj