IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 8059 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 283/07 OF PULPALLY POLICE STATION PETITIONER/6TH ACCUSED --------------------------------------- ASEEBA, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. MUHAMMED KASIM, KOCHUVAYAL VEEDU, EDAVA, VARKALA. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.K.NIJOY SRI.NIYAS A.SALAM RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 8059 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable, inter alia, under Sections 420 and 465 I.P.C. Altogether there are six accused persons. The petitioner is the 6th accused. The crux of the allegations raised in the crime is that the defacto complainant was fraudulently induced to marry the first accused, who had already contracted other marriages. Suppressing the fact that he had earlier got married, the first accused, in collusion with other accused, fraudulently misrepresented to the defacto complainant and her parents that he was a bachelor and thus induced the defacto complainant and her parents to part with amounts to the first accused. The petitioner/A6, a woman, also allegedly came for the marriage along with the first accused and was party to the fraud played on the defacto complainant by the first accused. To successfully defraud the defacto complainant, the first B.A.No. 8059 of 2007 2 accused allegedly produced a forged marriage certificate issued allegedly by accused 3 and 4. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. Even accepting all the allegations, all that turns out is that the petitioner had also participated in the marriage. This cannot expose her to any culpable liability for the offence which the first accused is alleged to have committed. The petitioner may, in these circumstances, be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the first accused, who belongs to Edava, had gone to the house of the defacto complainant in Wayanad and had fraudulently induced to marry her. The 6th accused has allegedly played a very active role in helping the first accused in making the misrepresentation. She was brought to Wayanad in an attempt to gain the confidence of the defacto complainant and her relatives. There is a further allegation that part of the dowry amount that was paid to the first accused was paid through the bank account of the petitioner herein also. B.A.No. 8059 of 2007 3 4. The case diary has been placed before me for my perusal. I am satisfied, on a consideration of all the relevant inputs, that there is merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to find any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) tm Judge B.A.No. 8059 of 2007 4