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. 6937 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.93/07 OF KORATTY POLICE STATION PETITIONER: APPLICANT ----------------------------- MANOJ, AGED 29 YEARS,S S/O.KRISHNANKUTTY KOZHIKKADAN HOUSE, ANNANADU, NEAR THRIVENI JUNCTION, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE KORATTY. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR 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. 6937 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 406, 408, 417, 419, 420, 465 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, de facto complainant was running an orphanage. Petitioner was helping her in running the same. She had also a Website in the name of the orphanage. Later, it ceased to be in existence. Petitioner created a new Website in the name of the orphanage and he started personating himself and collected huge amounts from various persons. He opened a bank account in his name and also in the name of the Website, and thereby he committed various offences. On a private complaint filed by de facto complainant, which was forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C, a crime was registered and after investigation, the charge sheet was laid against petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. Except bare allegations, there are no materials to connect the accused with the crime. Details of the bank account and the amount collected by him, if any, are not ascertained in investigation. The fact that petitioner BA.6937/08 2 created a Website is also not revealed in investigation. On the above grounds it is stated that he may be granted anticipatory bail. It is also submitted that a Writ Petition was filed by de facto complainant for a direction for appropriate investigation, but it was dismissed. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations made against petitioner are serious in nature. It is true that the details of the bank account were not collected during investigation before the charge sheet was filed. But, subsequently, de facto complainant filed a petition under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C for further investigation. He also wanted the crime to be investigated by the Hi-tech Cell, Thiruvananthapuram, since cyber crime is involved. The petition is posted to 29.12.2008. In a case of this nature, wherein cyber a crime is involved, a proper and effective investigation can be conducted only by the Hi-tech Cell. Therefore, if petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, it will adversely affect the investigation. Petitioner will have to be interrogated in custody by the police and that opportunity will be lost if he is granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that this is a case where a petition under Section 173(8) is pending. When a petition BA.6937/08 3 for further investigation is pending, it may not be proper on my part to make any specific observations on the merit of the case, since it may prejudice the decision to be taken in a petition filed under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. Considering the serious nature of allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.