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. 342 of 2010() ------------------------------- CRIME NO. 836/2009 OF HOSDURG POLICE STATION ................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 : ---------------------------------- P.V.SANKARAN, L.D.CLERK, NEHRU ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE, PADANNEKKAD, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH RESPONDENT/STATE : ------------------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HOSDURG POLICE STATION THROUGH 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. 342 of 2010 ------------------------------------ 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. 2 in Crime No.836/2009 of Hosdurg Police Station, Kasaragod District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120-B, 381, 465, 468 and 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: The first accused was a candidate for B.Com Supplementary Examination of Kannur University. The examination centre was at Nehru College, Kanhangad. On 17.12.2009, the first accused did not appear for the examination. The Examiner had noted that the first accused was absent. However, his answer sheets were found in the bundle of answer sheets sent to the University. It was also found out that corrections were made in the attendance sheet and other records in order to make it appear B.A. No. 342 of 2010 2 that the first accused appeared for the examination held on 17.12.2009. The prosecution case is that accused No.2 (petitioner), who was working as a Lower Division Clerk in Nehru College, Kanhangad provided the question papers and answer sheets to the first accused. It is alleged that the first accused wrote the answers in the answer sheet sitting in another room near the Canteen of the College and entrusted the same to the second accused. The second accused, misusing his position as a L.D. Clerk, had placed the answer sheet in the bundle of answer sheets. It is also alleged that he manipulated the entries in the relevant records to make it appear that the first accused appeared for the examination. 4. The offence alleged against the petitioner is grave in nature. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. 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 investigation of the case. I am B.A. No. 342 of 2010 3 also of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln