IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8471 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.211/2011 OF PANDIKKAD POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 --------------------------------- NELSE.K.MATHEW,S/O.MATHUKUTTY JOSEPH, AGED 27 YEARS,KADAPLACKAL HOUSE, THEEKOYI PO, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.8471 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 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.3 in Crime No.211 of 2011 of Pandikkad Police Station, Malappuram District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 468, 469 and 470 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. When the Bail Application came up for admission on 17.11.2011, the following order was passed : “3. The allegation is that the accused persons offered a job visa for the de facto complainant and a sum of ` 1,93,500/- was collected by them. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first accused in BA 8471/11 2 the present case cheated several persons including the petitioner by collecting money from them offering a visa to go abroad. It is submitted that the petitioner as well as the de facto complainant in the present case are similarly situated. The petitioner and the de facto complainant along with 25 others filed W.P.(C) No.3748 of 2011 alleging that the Ambalamedu Police, who registered Crime No.81 of 2011 against Johnson (the first accused in the present case) and his wife were not investigating the case properly. W.P.(C) No.3748 of 2011 was disposed of as per Annexure A3 judgment directing investigation of the case to be done by the C.B.C.I.D. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offences, I am of the view that before considering the question of granting anticipatory bail, the petitioner should be directed to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer on 22.11.2011 and 23.11.2011. 6. Post on 28.11.2011. BA 8471/11 3 7. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested in connection with Crime No.211 of 2011 of Pandikkad Police Station, till 30.11.2011. 8. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigating officer in the matter of investigation and for recovery of incriminating materials, if any. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this order before the investigating officer.” 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order dated 17.11.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 17.11.2011 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. BA 8471/11 4 There will be a direction that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for ` 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions : A) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required ; B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ; C) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; D) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl