IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2009 / 10TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3291 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.203/2009 OF VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION APPLICANT/ACCUSED ------------------------------------- THOMAS MATHEW, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. MATHEW, EDAKUDIYIL HOUSE, VELLIKULANGARA PO., MONADI DESOM. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING THE S.I. OF POLICE, VELLIKULANGARA POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3291 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.203 of 2009 of Vellikulangara Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 406, 420 and 506(I) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. I have gone through the case diary. 4. The case of the de facto complainant is that the accused received money promising to arrange ornaments for the wedding of the sister of the de facto complainant. Though the de facto complainant was directed to go to jewellery which was complied with by him, he was not given either the ornaments or the money. It is also stated that the de facto complainant and his family members were placed in such a situation where they thought of committing suicide. Some other persons helped them to tide over the situation. B.A. NO. 3291 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the de facto complainant filed a petition before the Superintendent of Police and it was forwarded to the Sub Inspector of Police, Mala. The de facto complainant also gave a statement to the Sub Inspector of Police, Mala. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the petition filed before the Superintendent of Police and the statement given by the de facto complainant before the Sub Inspector of Police, Vellikunalgara are contradictory and irreconcilable on certain aspects. I do not wish to pronounce upon that aspect of the case as it is not necessary for the disposal of the Bail Application to arrive at a finding on the merits of the contentions. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/