IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5245 of 2009(K) ------------------------------ CRIME NO.249/2009 OF MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.3 --------------------------------------------- KADHRYA BEEVI, AGED 55 YEARS, W/O. MOHAMMED MEERAN PILLAI, NOORMEERA, NO.51, STATE BANK COLONY (OLD), NAGARCOIL, KAYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU. BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA COURT, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5245 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 ORDER 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.249 of 2009 of Mangalapuram Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram Rural. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 420, 463 and 495 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The defacto complainant filed a complaint before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Attingal against accused Nos.1 and 2. That complaint was forwarded to the police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The crime was accordingly registered. The petitioner was subsequently added as an accused. The prosecution case is that the first accused married the defacto complainant suppressing the fact that he had married another woman earlier. The petitioner is the mother of the first accused. BA No.5245/2009 2 4. 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.25,000/- 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 csl