IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5819 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.460/2011 OF MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 : ---------------------------------- N.UDAYAKUMAR, S/O.CHINNAN, AGED 43 YEARS, CASA BLANCA APARTMENTS, FLATS NO.503, KASABA AMSOM AND DESOM, P.O.CHALAPURAM, KOZHIKODE-673 002. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE ---------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE-673 008. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.5819 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.460 of 2011 of Medical College Police Station, Kozhikode. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that accused No.2 informed the de facto complainant that accused No.1 would arrange a job for the wife of the de facto complainant in a management school. On that promise, the de facto complainant paid ` 3 lakhs to the first accused in the presence of accused No.2 and as directed by accused No.2. However, the job was not provided and the de facto complainant was thus cheated. BA 5819/2011 2 4. The offence alleged is grave in nature. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it is only a civil dispute does not, prima facie, appear to be correct. In a case of this nature, the discretionary relief under Section 438 Crl.P.C. cannot be exercised to grant anticipatory bail. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl