IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2010 / 9TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 7510 of 2009() -------------------------------- CRIME NO. 463/2009 OF PALODE POLICE STATION ............... PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED : ------------------------------- GIRIJA, KRISHNAVILASOM, CHEMBANKODU, ELAVATTOM.P.O, KURUPUZHA VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SREEJITH RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITIONER : -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 7510 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of January, 2010 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.1 in Crime No.463/2009 of Palode Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The second accused is the husband of the first accused. He is working abroad. The prosecution case is that promising job to the de facto complainant at Dubai Airport, a sum of Rs. 1,15,000/- was received by the accused persons. The amount was paid to the first accused on behalf of accused No.2 as well. Though visa was arranged and the de facto complainant went abroad, he did not get the job which was offered, and therefore, he came back to India. The de facto complainant filed a complaint before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-1, Nedumangad, which was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Crime was accordingly registered. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. B.A. No. 7510 of 2009 2 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her executing bond for Rs. 15,000/- 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 ln