IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI FRIDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2010 / 11TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7073 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 961/2009 OF THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ SUSAN @ MARIAMMA CHANDY, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O.VARKEY CHANDY, VADAKKETHALAKKAL, KADAPRA, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE S.I OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. C.S.HRITHWIK THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. No. 7073 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated: JANUARY 1, 2010 O R D E R This is an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused in Crime No.961 of 2009 of Thiruvalla Police Station under section 438 of Cr.P.C. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused has sold a golden colour item weighing 5 k.gms. to the de facto complainant, pretending it to be a gold bar and that thereby committed an offence punishable under section 420 read with section 34 IPC. 3. The material averments in the petition in brief are these:- The petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against her. The petitioner is engaged in the real estate business and she was on inimical terms with the de facto complainant. Due to this enmity, the de facto complainant has foisted a false case against her. There are also seven similar cases pending against the petitioner before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thiruvalla, which are all foisted by the de facto complainant. The petitioner apprehends arrest and harassment at the hands of the police. Therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted to her. 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. BA 7073/09 2 5. The alleged incident occurred on June 14, 2009 and the complaint was filed by the de facto complainant only on November 3, 2009. The delay was not explained. There are other cases pending between them. Under these circumstances apprehension of the petitioner regarding the alleged harassment by the police appears to be true. Therefore, I feel that this is a fit case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. The respondent is directed to release the petitioner on bail, in the event of her arrest, on her executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two solvent sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the lower court. If released on bail, the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall co-operate with the investigation. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn/-