IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5075 of 2009 CRIME NO.303 OF 2009 OF PEROORKKADA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ SASIDHARAN,AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, AMBALATHARA VEEDU, KADAMPANADU.PO, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP M.VARUGHESE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEROORKADA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 5075 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of September, 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 first accused in Crime No.303 of 2009 of Peroorkkada Police Station. 2. The offence alleged against the accused persons is under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The de facto complainant, Chandrasekharan Nair, was working as Conductor in K.S.R.T.C., he having got appointment through Employment Exchange. The petitioner was working as Driver in KSRTC in Peroorkkada Depot. The allegation is that the petitioner, B.Sasidharan, made the de facto complainant believe that a relative of Sasidharan by name Mohanan Pillai was the Private Secretary of the Honourable Minister for Irrigation and that Mohanan Pillai is a leader of Revolutionary Socialist Party. It is further alleged that the petitioner made the de facto complainant believe that with the help of Mohanan Pillai, a job can be arranged for the de facto B.A. NO. 5075 OF 2009 :: 2 :: complainant in Travancore Titanium. It is alleged that Sasidharan made the petitioner believe that three seats are available for RSP in Travancore Titanium and that the de facto complainant had to pay Rs.1,50,000/- for getting the job. Towards the said sum, an advance of Rs.40,000/- was taken from the de facto complainant. Another driver, Ravi, is also involved in the transaction. A blank cheque was given by Mohanan Pillai after having received Rs.40,000/- from the de facto complainant. An affidavit was also got from the de facto complainant indicating that no cases are pending against the de facto complainant in any court. It is alleged that even after the agreed period of one month, the de facto complainant did not get job in Travancore Titanium. The de facto complainant demanded to pay back the money paid by him, when he did not get the job on the agreed date or on the extended dates. At that time, the de facto complainant was told to present the cheque after incorporating the figure of Rs.40,000/- in the blank cheque given by Mohann Pillai. Accordingly, the cheque was presented, but it was dishonoured on two occasions on the ground that there was no sufficient fund in the account. Sasidharan is now working at KSRTC Depot, Adoor. The de facto complainant alleged that the accused persons, namely, Sasidharan, Mohanan Pillai and Ravi cheated him. B.A. NO. 5075 OF 2009 :: 3 :: 4. During investigation, it was revealed that one Raffi, son of Shihabudheen, Jose, son of George and certain others have paid various amounts to the accused persons on their making similar promises. The second accused was arrested and he was later released on bail. The petitioner apprehends arrest. Therefore, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 5. The offence alleged is serious in nature. The allegations would affect other persons who have absolutely no connection with the incident. The name of the Honourable Minister for Irrigation is also unnecessarily dragged into the incident. It may affect his reputation. It would also give an impression among public that persons employed in KSRTC, leaders of political parties and others could arrange job in other companies and establishments. If true, it would certainly affect the opportunities of the general public to get a job through proper channel. Back door entry into jobs is to be deprecated. Receiving money offering such back door entry is still worse. The petitioner, who is alleged to have committed such crime has now approached this Court with a prayer to grant the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal B.A. NO. 5075 OF 2009 :: 4 :: Procedure. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the discretionary relief in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is not entitled to any such relief. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. The observations made above shall not be treated as observations or findings on the merits of the case. Those observations have been made only for considering and disposing of the application for anticipatory bail. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/