IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4419 of 2008() ------------------------- CRIME NO.215/08 OF NILAMBUR POLICE STATION PETITIONER: --------------- P.RAMLA AGED 34 YEARS, D/O.ABDURAHMAN PAMPODAN HOUSE, KUNNATHODIVAKA VYTHIRI, WYNAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE NILAMBUR THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 4419 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces allegations as the 4th accused in a crime registered at the Nilambur police station alleging offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 I.P.C. Altogether there are four accused persons. 2. The crux of the allegations is that the accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed theft of 1000 kgs. of rubber sheets worth Rs. 1 lakh and transported the same in a vehicle owned by the petitioner. Accused 1 to 4 allegedly were involved in the attempt to sell such stolen rubber sheets and they did ultimately sell the rubber sheets to a person at Tellicherry. In the F.I.R. no person was arrayed as the accused. In the course of investigation the complicity of accused 1 to 4 was ascertained and a report to that effect was filed. The petitioner approached the bail Bench of this Court for anticipatory bail. That application was rejected. The petitioner Crl.M.C.No. 4419 of 2008 2 has not challenged that order. Instead, the petitioner has come to this Court with a prayer that the crime registered in so far as it relates to her may be quashed. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the only involvement of the petitioner is that the vehicle in which the stolen rubber sheets were carried belong to her. She has no other involvement whatsoever in the crime, contends the learned counsel. 3. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor, who opposes the prayer. The learned Prosecutor submits that the allegation is not merely that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, the precise allegation is that the theft was committed by accused 1 to 3 in furtherance of the common intention which they shared with the petitioner herein. The petitioner was crucially involved in the attempt to transport the stolen articles and to dispose of the same. Materials have been collected to show the involvement of the petitioner in the transportation and disposal of the stolen articles. It is idle for the petitioner at this stage to contend that the F.I.R. must be quashed and the investigation against her should not be continued. Crl.M.C.No. 4419 of 2008 3 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I find force in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. The petitioner's attempt to secure anticipatory bail has not met with success. It is for the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there may be a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider the application for bail of the petitioner expeditiously and favourably when she surrenders before him. It is for the petitioner to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail. Needless to say, such application for regular bail must be considered by the learned Magistrate on merits and in accordance with law – in terms of Section 437 Cr.P.C. No further, specific or better directions appear to be necessary. 6. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed with the above observations. (R. BASANT) Judge tm Crl.M.C.No. 4419 of 2008 4