IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1237 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 26/08 OF KOOTATTUKULAM POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 -------------------------------------- SANGEETHA BHASKAR, CHIRATTAPURATH VEEDU, PALAKKAMATTOM KARA, KINGINIMATTOM. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP MOHAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT/STATE ------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOOTHATTUKULAM POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1237 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations in a crime registered alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 409 I.P.C. The petitioner was the Secretary of a Milk Co-operative Society. While discharging the duties as such Secretary of the Society, she is alleged to have committed the offence of misappropriation, breach of trust and falsification of documents of the society. The crime has been registered on the basis of a private complaint filed by the Hon. Secretary of the society, who had taken charge after the petitioner was kept under suspension. Specific instances of culpable indiscretion are alleged against the petitioner as also two other employees of the society. The complaint was forwarded under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the police. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. B.A.No. 1237 of 2008 2 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. False and vexatious allegations are being raised against the petitioner. She is not guilty of any misappropriation or other culpable indiscretion. She is not in any way responsible for the culpable indiscretion of the co-accused. In these circumstances it is prayed that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the complaint gives the graphic details of various acts of culpable indiscretion on the part of the petitioner. He has placed before me the case diary for my perusal. The Investigating Officer heavily relies on the admissions made by the petitioner in a letter submitted to the President, copy of which is available in the case diary. In such letter she owns the responsibility for the indiscretion and undertakes that the amounts shall be repaid. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs and the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, 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 B.A.No. 1237 of 2008 3 petitioner. This I agree with the learned Prosecutor, 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) Judge tm