IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6912 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.399/2008 OF PAYANAGADI POLICE STATION PETITIONER : 1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------ MARIYAMBI.K. D/O.LATE IBRAHIM,KALATHIL HOUSE PUTHIYANGADI, BEACH ROAD, MADAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.K.P.HARISH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,PAYANGADI POLICE STATION, (CR.NO.399/2008)PAYANAGADI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE-REPRESENTED BY PUBLC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6912 of 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC. According to prosecution, petitioner (A1) applied for a passport and along with that, a forged marriage certificate was produced. The application was made through an agent. During police verification, it was found out that petitioner is not even married but, she has produced a forged marriage certificate along with passport application. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a woman aged 22 years who studied only up to sixth standard. She has given the passport application since her aunt, who is in Saudi Arabia, wanted her to apply for a passport, for getting a job for her in Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, she applied for a passport, but, without her knowledge, a forged marriage certificate was also produced along with the application. She suspects that the certificate would have been produced in BA No.6912 /2008 2 conspiracy of the agent with her aunt. But, petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. It is also submitted that at the time of police verification, it was the petitioner who told the police that she was unmarried when she was asked about her marital status. This fact will indicate her innocence, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that application for passport was submitted by the petitioner and a marriage certificate was also produced for the purpose of obtaining a passport. Why an unmarried person was shown as a married person, why a marriage certificate was produced etc. are to be investigated into. Hence, if anticipatory bail is granted, it will adversely affect the investigation. It is also submitted that in a case of this nature, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the nature of allegations made and the nature of investigation that may be required, I am not inclined grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner is required for investigation and interrogation. Petitioner has not appeared before the Investigating Officer or surrendered before BA No.6912 /2008 3 the Magistrate court. Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Magistrate court or the Investigating Officer without delay and co-operate with investigation. Whether she surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest her in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl