IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3212 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.133/2009 OF SREEKARYAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST.) PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- N.RAJENRAN,AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN,RESIDING AT RESHMA BHAVAN,KALIYKKAL, KUDAVOOR.P.O,VENGODE. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH. K.RAJU SRI.INNOCENT FRANCIS PAPALI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. TH CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J ----------------------- B.A No.3212 OF 2010 -------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of June 2010 ORDER This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 420 r/w 34 IPC. According to prosecution, the accused in this case who were running an institution had collected various amounts from various persons on the promise that they will be given job in the Human Resources Department. But, job was not arranged and the amount was not returned and thereby committed various offences. 3. Petitioner is the third accused in the crime. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that absolutely no allegation is made against third accused. In the FIS, allegations are all made against first accused. Petitioner has not committed any offence and he has not collected any amount from anybody. Hence, he will be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner was working as a Project Officer in the institution run by first accused and he had also collected money from various persons and committed the same offence. Though there is nothing in the FIS to connect petitioner with the crime, investigation in this case reveal the involvement of petitioner. Statements of the B.A No.3212 OF 2010 2 witnesses who have paid money are also available in the Case Diary. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and on going through the Case Diary, I am satisfied of the submissions made by the learned Public Prosecutor and considering the serious nature of the allegations made and need for interrogation, I am satisfied that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA JUDGE vdv