IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 10TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 21ST MAGHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 870 of 2011() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 42/2011 OF PUTHUKKAD POLICE STATION. ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------------- 1. REMADEVI, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.BHASKARAN, KUTTAT HOUSE, CHUNANGAD POST, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 2. INDIRA, AGED 49 YEARS, W/O.RAMACHANDRAN, CHAMAKKALAYIL HOUSE, CHUNANGAD, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 3. LEELA, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O.GOPI, MOOTHEDATH HOUSE, CHIRANGARA, MAYANNUR, KONDAZHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. RADHAMANI, AGED 52 YEARS, W/O.VELAYUDHAN, POOKKATTUPARAMBIL, MANGALA POST, LEKKADI, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 5. ANJU, AGED 19 YEARS, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, POOKKOTTU PARAMBIL, MANGALAM POST, LEKKIDI, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 6. BABITHA, AGED 30 YEARS, W/O.NANDAKUMAR, ANGADIYIL HOUSE, MANGALAM POST, LEKKIDI, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 7. RAJIKALA, AGED 27 YEARS, W/O.BIJU, POOKKOTTUPARAMBIL, MANGALAM POST, LEKKIDI, OTTAPALAM TALUK. 8. SHERINA, AGED 26 YEARS, W/O.ALI, KOOLAYIL HOUSE, AGALOOR POST, LEKKIDI, OTTAPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI BA NO.870/2011 RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHUKKAD POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V. RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Application No.870 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of February, 2011 ORDER Petitioners seek anticipatory bail on the allegation that the Puthukkad Police are at their heels in connection with Crime No.42 of 2011 of Puthukkad Police Station. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners are only suspects in the above crime and they have not so far been arrayed as accused in the above case. If so, the apprehension of arrest and harassment entertained by the petitioners is unfounded. In case the petitioners are required to be interrogated again the police shall do so after giving them notice under Sec.160 Cr.P.C. Recording the submission made by the Public Prosecutor, this petition is closed. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj