IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2011 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6981 of 2011() ----------------------------- CR.NO.701 OF 2011 OF NEDUPUZHA POLICE STATION PETITIONER: -------------------- M.J.KURIAN, S/O.JACOB, MOLARIKKAL HOUSE PORATHISSERY, IRNJALAKKUDA NORTH. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM ,REPRESENTING STATION HOUSE OFFICER IRINJALAKKUDA POLICE STATION, IRINJALAKKUDA 680121 THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY P.P.SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.6981 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of December, 2011 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.701 of 2011 of Nedupuzha Police Station. In the Bail Application, the petitioner stated that he does not know the crime number. The name of the police station is shown as Irinjalakuda Police Station. Later, an application was filed to correct the name of the police station as Nedupuzha Police Station. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved as accused No.3 in Crime No.701 of 2011 of Nedupuzha Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 465, 468, 472 and 475 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. B.A.No. 6981 OF 2011 2 3. The prosecution case is that without conducting any courses in Ayurveda, the accused persons collected amounts from various persons and issued certificates showing that those persons attended various courses and passed the various examinations held by the institute run by Ayur Star Health Care Society, which was allegedly affiliated to Bharatheeya Gurukula Vidyapeedam Open University. 4. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. 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 and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms