IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2011 / 2ND BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6228 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ Crime No.193 of 2011 of Kalpetta Police Station, Wayanad District. PETITIONERS : ACCUSED ------------------------ 1. SURESH, S/O. SELVARAJ NADAR, DAS VILLA, M.S.A. ROAD, MUNNAR. 2. SHEEBA SURESH, W/O. SURESH, DAS VILLA, M.S.A. ROAD, MUNNAR. BY ADV. SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALPETTA, DIST. WAYANAD-673121. 3. SMT. MADHUMATHI, ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT(P.W.D.), KALPETTA, DIST. WYNAD-673121. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.6228 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of August, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioners are accused Nos.4 and 3 in Crime No.193 of 2011 of Kalpetta Police Station, Wayanad District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant is working as an Assistant Executive Engineer in the Public Works Department. She belongs to Kalpetta in Wayanad District. She has physical disablity. She had friendship through Internet with the first accused over the last few years. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are the sisters of accused No.1 and accused No.4 is the husband of accused No.2. Accused No.5 is the mother of accused No.1. The allegation is that over a period of time, under one pretext or other, the accused persons made false representations and extracted money to the tune of `45,50,000/- from the de facto complainant. Bail Appln.No.6228/2011 : 2 : 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioners may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj