IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2010 / 23TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 55 of 2010() --------------------------- CRIME NO.366/2009 OF ELATHUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------ 1. KAMALA C., W/O. LATE RATHNAKARAN, AGED 53 YEARS, PARATHRIKZANDY HOUSE, KACHERI AMSOM, WEST BILL DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2. REKHA, D/O.LATE RATHNAKARAN, AGED 27, MELURKULANGARA HOUSE, P.O.MELUR, PANTLAYANI AMSOM, MELUR DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ( STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ELATHUR) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.55 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of January, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.366 of 2009 of Elathur Police Station, Kozhikode District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioners is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant filed a complaint before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Koyilandi which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the crime was registered. 4. Accused No.1 is the elder sister of the de facto complainant. Accused No.2 is the daughter of accused No.1. The case of the de facto complainant is that in June 2006, the accused persons borrowed 12 sovereigns of gold ornaments from the de facto complainant for the purpose of pledging the same to meet the marriage expenses of accused No.2. The case is that even after the purpose was over, the gold ornaments were not returned. It is BA No.55/2010 2 alleged that the gold ornaments were received knowing fully well that they would not return the same and thereby loss would be occasioned to the de facto complainant. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs.15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl