IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2008 / 10TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5422 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.131/08 OF ALLITHOTTAM POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ ACCUSED ------------------------------------ SISTER ALBEENA MARY, AGED 72 YEARS, ST.MARY'S CONVENT, PORT KOLLAM, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMMED SRI.JUDE B.ALEX RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SIG- II, CBCID, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 5422 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is an inmate of the St.Mary's Convent. One Sister Anupa Mary, who is also attached to the same Convent, committed suicide in the visiting room of the Convent. A crime was registered as Crime No.131/2008 of Pallithottam Police Station on 11.8.2008 under the caption 'unnatural death'. A suicide note was seized by the police which makes a reference to petitioner's name and hence, petitioner apprehends arrest, detention and humiliation. Hence, this petition for anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do with the suicide and she has no role in the incident. She is aged 72 years and she is a retired teacher, rendering social service for the past 45 years. It is stated that an alleged suicide note is allegedly seized by the police, in which some reference is made about the petitioner and hence, the petitioner apprehends arrest and detention. The petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made and no offence is also made put against the petitioner. BA.5437/08 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner and several other witnesses were questioned in connection with the death of Sister Anupa Mary. The postmortem examination was also conducted on the body of the deceased. In the light of the statements given by various witnesses, including the parents of the deceased the facts revealed from postmortem report, the statement of the doctors etc., there is a strong suspicion regarding the death of the deceased. The petitioner is strongly suspected to have some role in the death, but, no sufficient materials are obtained to implicate her as an accused in the crime. The investigation is at the very preliminary stage and hence anticipatory bail may not be granted to the petitioner, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, it is clear that the petitioner has not been made an accused in the crime. What is the offence, if any, committed is also not concluded at this stage of investigation. Therefore, the petitioner has no reason to believe that she will be arrested for having committed any non-bailable offence. In the absence of any such apprehension of arrest, anticipatory bail cannot be granted under Section 438 Cr.P.C. For invoking the said provision, the twin conditions referred to therein must exist, namely; (1) reasonable belief that the petitioner will be arrested and (2) that such apprehension on an accusation of having BA.5437/08 3 committed a non-bailable offence. Both conditions do not exist in this case, for the time being, and hence, no ground exists for granting anticipatory bail. It is not sufficient if the petitioner presumes that she may be arrested, but there must be a serious apprehension of arrest. Such apprehension is lacking in this case and hence the petitioner is too premature. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in case, the petitioner is likely to be arrested at a subsequent stage, it may be made clear by an order that she has the right to approach this Court again. It is needless to say that the dismissal of this petition will not, in any way, preclude the petitioner from approaching this Court again, if there exist grounds to invoke provision under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The dismissal of this petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner from moving this court again for appropriate relief. The respondent is directed to issue notice in writing to petitioner if she is required for questioning by police, in accordance with law. With these observations, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.