IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2009 / 29TH SRAVANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4248 of 2009() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 204/2009 OF PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION ........................ PETITIONERS : --------------------- 1. MURALEEDHARAN.K.R., AGED 44 YEARS, KAITHAVALAPPIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM. 2. BIJU.K.V., AGED 36 YEARS, KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VALIYAVATTOM, NJARAKKAL, ERNAKULAM. 3. P.P. LAWRANCE, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. PAILY, PANIKKATHARA HOUSE, MALIPPURAM, KARTHEDAM, ERNAKULAM. 4. ALEXANDER SUNIL BATHERI, AGED 35 YEARS, BATHERI HOUSE, 7/737, JEW TOWN, COCHIN-2. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENT: -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE, PARAPPANANGADI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY SRI. GIKKU JACOB PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4248 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of August, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos. 1, 4, 5 and 6 in Crime No.204/2009 of Parappanangadi Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is that, the accused persons induced people to deposit Rs. 2000/- each under the promise, that they would be given Insurance coverage, medi-claim, interest etc and if they canvass two members to the fund, the person concerned would get back the amount paid by him. It is stated that the directors of the alleged company of the accused, namely, Sree Sathyam (India) Marketing network Ltd used to convene meetings in a hotel at Parappanangadi and used to collect money from members who were newly joined as depositors. However, no receipts would be issued to the persons who deposit money. The Insurance certificates were also not B.A. No. 4248 of 2009 2 used to issued to them. It was realised by the defacto complainant that the transaction was just like a money chain transaction and that the accused persons were indulged in cheating the general public. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners are not entitled to any discretionary relief. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln