IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2009 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2626 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.415/2006 OF VAIKOM POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED ------------------------------ UMADEVI,W/O. NARAYANAN NAIR NARAYANA HOUSE, SOUTH GATE P.O.,VAIKOM. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------- B.A.No.2626 of 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of May, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.415 of 2006 of Vaikom Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner are under sections 409, 201 and 381 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner was working as thondi clerk in the court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vaikom, from 3.11.1990 to 21.4.1994 and as record clerk from 11.10.1996 to 15.11.2000. During that period, in one criminal case the accused was convicted on 31.3.1993. Thondi articles therein were inspected on 25.6.2004 and at that time it was found there was a deficit of gold and currency to the tune of 34.55 gms. and Rs.1296/- respectively. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the thondi articles and valuables should be inspected every three months and there is no case BA No.2626/2009 2 that the petitioner was in charge of the thondi articles during the period from 22.4.1994 to 10.10.1996 and after 15.11.2000. The offence could be committed by any person in charge during this period, submits the counsel. The learned public prosecutor submitted that an enquiry was conducted by the Registrar of the High Court and it was found that the petitioner is responsible for the missing of the valuables. He also submitted that the petitioner was removed from service on certain other allegations. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail for a period of one month on her executing bond for Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; BA No.2626/2009 3 B) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. E) On the expiry of the period mentioned above, the petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate concerned and seek regular bail. F) 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