IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5683 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.188/2011 OF ENATHU POLICE STATION (CBCID CRIME No.395/CR/Kollam. PETITIONER : ACCUSED : ---------------------- ABEY THOMAS, S/O.M.A.THOMAS,MANCHAYIL VEEDU, PALAKKATHAKIDY P.O, KUNNAMTHANAM VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ENATHU POLICE STATION, REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM ADDL.D.G.P.SRI.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.No.5683 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 02nd day of December, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.8 in Crime No.188 of 2011 of Enathu Police Station, which is now being investigated by CBCID in Crime No.395/CR/Kollam. 2. The offence alleged against the accused is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner as promoter of Nano Excel Corporation collected huge amounts of Rupees Forty six lakhs from various persons making a promise that if they invested money in the Nano Excel Corporation, they would get high returns. But the depositors did not get any return nor did they get back the principal amount. The de facto complainant and others approached the police and accordingly the crime was registered. 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, Bail Appln.No.5683/2011 : 2 : I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, 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