IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 777 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 5/08 OF THE KASABA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ UDAYAKUMAR, S/O. CHANDU, AGED 42 YEARS, EANTHULLAKANDY PARAMBA, NEERVELI P.O., MERUVAMBAI, KOOTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASABA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 777 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 420 I.P.C. He is the appraiser in a bank. The complaint has been lodged by the bank. The crux of the allegations is that the petitioner in collusion with the loanees, has been fraudulently certifying spurious gold to be genuine gold to facilitate siphoning out amounts to the detriment of the bank. As many as 24 loanees and 64 incidents of such loans amounting to a total dishonest siphoning out of Rs. 7.9 lakhs of the bank have been identified by now. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not in any way connected with any fraudulent attempt by the loanees. He has discharged his duties dutifully and honestly. The possibility of genuine gold being B.A.No. 777 of 2008 2 substituted with spurious gold by the officials of the bank cannot be ruled out. In these circumstances anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner, prays the learned counsel. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the totality of circumstances definitely point to the contumacious complicity of the petitioner. At this stage, absolutely there is no reason to doubt or suspect the version of the bank. The petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail, submits the Prosecutor. 4. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. After having considered all the relevant inputs, I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. The theory of the possibility of dishonest errors committed by the petitioner or the possibility of the ornaments being substituted by the officials do not appear to me as a probable version which can justify this Court invoking the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case B.A.No. 777 of 2008 3 where the petitioner must be directed to appear before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm